The father of a wanted Hong Kong activist has been jailed for 8 months after he sought to cancel an insurance policy linked to an “absconder.”

Kwok Yin-sang appeared at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Thursday morning to receive his sentence, after being found guilty earlier in February of attempting to obtain funds last year from an AIA insurance policy that belonged to his daughter, Anna Kwok.

His daughter lives in the US and has been wanted by national security police for suspected foreign collusion since 2023.

Handing down the jail term, Acting Principal Magistrate Andy Cheng said the offence – under the city’s homegrown security law – was serious and that Kwok had showed no remorse.

He acknowledged that Kwok did not do anything that directly endangered national security, and that the funds – if successfully withdrawn – would only be used by the defendant.

But Cheng said HK$88,000, the approximate balance of the policy, was not a small amount. In attempting to cancel the policy, Kwok had committed the “dishonest” behaviour of forging his daughter’s signature, Cheng added.

He also said that Kwok’s offence of attempting to deal with the funds could have increased the chances of his daughter not coming back to Hong Kong to face trial, therefore making it difficult for the law to prevent acts endangering national security.

Community service was therefore not a suitable punishment, Cheng said.

He set a starting sentence of nine months, and reduced it by one month considering Kwok’s old age and the fact that he had no criminal record, arriving at an eight-month sentence.

First conviction of family member

Handling an absconder’s funds is an offence under Article 23.

This case marks the first time that a family member of a wanted activist has been convicted of a national security offence.

Consulate representatives from the UK, US, Germany and Belgium were among those observing the proceedings in the public gallery.

Kwok was accused of attempting to obtain funds in January and February last year from an AIA International life and personal accident insurance policy that he bought for his daughter in 1999, when she was a toddler.

During the trial, the court heard that Kwok had contacted his insurance agent to cancel the policy as his daughter was not in Hong Kong anymore.

Mitigation

The sentencing was handed down after Cheng addressed a number of additional mitigation matters.

The mitigation hearing was held earlier this month on the same day that the judge ruled Kwok was guilty, but Cheng said he received additional mitigation submissions, including three mitigation letters – one written by Kwok, and two by his two sons – this Wednesday.

Ahead of the sentencing, Cheng said he was not convinced by the defence’s view that the aim of the law was just to prevent the absconder from committing illegal acts with their funds. The law also aimed to pressure absconders to come back to Hong Kong and face trial.

Barrister Jason Szeto, representing Kwok, said he did not think that whether or not the absconder would return to Hong Kong was a “point of consideration” in the law.

The mitigation letters referenced Kwok’s health, including that he experienced headaches and neck pain, Cheng said. Szeto confirmed that Kwok did not have any major ailments, only conditions that were typical of old age.

The letters written by Kwok’s two sons mentioned that he was a law-abiding citizen who started his own business after coming to Hong Kong from mainland China.

Separate from the 2020 Beijing-enacted security law, the homegrown Safeguarding National Security Ordinance targets treason, insurrection, sabotage, external interference, sedition, and theft of state secrets and espionage. It allows for pre-charge detention of up to 16 days, suspects’ access to lawyers may be restricted, and penalties can involve up to life in prison.  

Its legislation failed in 2003 following mass protests and it remained taboo until 2024 when it was fast-tracked at the city’s opposition-free legislature. The law has been criticised by rights NGOs, Western states and the UN as vague, broad and “regressive.” But authorities cite perceived foreign interference and a constitutional duty to “close loopholes” after the 2019 protests and unrest.