PROTESTS IN HONG KONG

The Umbrella Revolution, Act II

July 2025

A Fondemos case study

KEY POINTS

• On March 29, 2019, the Hong Kong government officially introduced the (amendment) bill modifying extradition and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. This text aimed to allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China.
• What is known as the “anti-extradition bill movement” began on April 28, 2019. This large series of demonstrations was triggered by fears of Beijing’s growing influence over Hong Kong’s judicial system.
• The protests, mainly led by students, quickly grew: from tens of thousands of people in March, they rose to millions of demonstrators in June 2019, becoming the largest mobilization in Hong Kong’s history.
• The protesters achieved their main demand: the complete withdrawal of the extradition bill in September 2019.
• International organizations denounced the widespread use of violence against protesters.

CONTEXT

The anger that erupted in 2019 did not come out of nowhere. It had been building up for years. In 1997, when Britain handed Hong Kong back to China, both sides had agreed that Hong Kong would retain its freedoms under the “One Country, Two Systems” model.

This model guaranteed Hongkongers fundamental freedoms such as an independent judiciary, the right to protest, and freedom of expression — rights denied to the population of mainland China. These rights were guaranteed until 2047, but many in Hong Kong felt they were already eroding under the pressure of central power. Beijing’s growing interference in media, universities, and political life was increasingly felt by the population. Moreover, the memory of the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 had long been a symbol of anti-Beijing sentiment and continued to inspire resistance.

On March 29, 2019, these tensions came to a head when the Hong Kong government proposed a bill allowing the extradition of individuals suspected of crimes to mainland China. One million protesters then gathered in Hong Kong on June 9, 2019 to denounce this bill. They rallied around five key demands: its withdrawal, the recognition of the term ‘protest’ rather than ‘riot,’ the release of arrested protesters, an investigation into police conduct, and the establishment of transparent democratic elections. Despite police attempts to end these demonstrations by force, they continued until late 2020.

Role of students and youth

Although the 2019 protests mobilized the entire Hong Kong population, students played a major role. Most of the key actions, such as front-line confrontations with the police and the occupation of universities, were carried out by young protesters, mostly from higher education and secondary schools.

As the movement gained momentum, university boycotts intensified, turning several universities into iconic protest sites. Among them, the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) and the Polytechnic University became the scene of violent clashes between protesters and law enforcement, particularly after a police raid at CUHK in November 2019, which sparked outrage and triggered a new wave of resistance. These students were not only demanding the withdrawal of the bill but also a better democratic system, accountability for police forces, and the protection of Hong Kong’s freedoms.

What next?

While the first demand, the withdrawal of the bill, was met in September 2019, the others were ignored. On June 16, two million people (according to organizers) marched peacefully, illustrating the scale the movement had reached.

The government’s refusal to engage in genuine dialogue, combined with police violence (including the first use of tear gas on June 12 in the Admiralty and Central districts), marked a major turning point. That same day, arrested protesters were charged with participation in “riots,” a first since the beginning of the movement. The protests were then repressed with what was considered disproportionate police violence: extensive use of tear gas, batons, rubber bullets, water cannons, and mass arrests (more than 1,300 people). Amnesty International condemned these practices, highlighting violations of the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality in police interventions.

A major turning point

A major political turning point occurred during the local district council elections on November 24, 2019, perceived as a true referendum on the protests. With more than 2.9 million voters, these elections resulted in a landslide victory for pro-democracy candidates, revealing massive public support for the movement.

However, on June 30, 2020, China imposed the National Security Law, effectively criminalizing dissent, allowing mass arrests, and silencing democratic opposition. The implementation of this legislation marked a decisive turning point in Hong Kong’s governance. It led to the disqualification of opposition candidates, the closure of several civil society organizations, and a sharp shrinking of the political and civic space that had until then characterized the city’s semi-autonomous status.

A leaderless mobilization?

A notable aspect of the Hong Kong mobilization was its “leaderless” organization, relying on small, responsive networks. Johnson Ching-Yin Yeung, a pro-democracy movement organizer, instead described it as a “leader-full” movement, stating that coordination took place across numerous informal groups rather than within a centralized hierarchy. As decisions were made within these decentralized networks, the movement could quickly respond to changing circumstances on the ground and adapt its tactics in real time.

Digital platforms also played a crucial role in the functioning of this structure. Protesters largely used encrypted messaging applications, such as Telegram, to organize actions and maintain anonymity. The administrators of these groups effectively assumed coordination roles, managing logistics and ensuring operational security.

In an interview, pro-democracy activist Nathan Law emphasized the strategic use of online forums and social networks to disseminate information and rally support. He noted that this digital mobilization played a key role in maintaining the movement’s momentum and engaging the international community.

The adaptability of the movement was also visible in its tactics. Protesters adopted the “Be Water” strategy, characterized by fluid and spontaneous actions, allowing them to evade police repression and maintain pressure on the authorities. This approach was made possible by real-time communication and a shared understanding of objectives among participants. Despite the absence of formal leadership structures, the 2019 protests stood out for their sophisticated organization, leveraging technology and close-knit networks to effectively coordinate large-scale actions.

In summary:

The 2019 protests marked a turning point in Hong Kong’s history. Although the movement succeeded in securing the withdrawal of the extradition bill and drew the attention of the international community, it later faced increased repression following the implementation of the National Security Law by Beijing.

Despite this, the movement left a lasting mark. The courage of the youth, particularly students, became a powerful image of resistance. As activist Benny Tai stated: “Darker times await Hong Kong, but the sun will rise again.”

WHY DID THE MOVEMENT FAIL TO PREVAIL?

Although the 2019 protests in Hong Kong captured global attention and revealed immense popular will, the movement ultimately failed to achieve most of its demands. Several factors explain this outcome.

• The balance of power was profoundly unequal. The protesters were up against one of the most powerful authoritarian regimes in the world, wielding total control over security forces, media, and legal instruments.
• Repression was swift: In 2020, Beijing imposed the National Security Law, which criminalized dissent, dismantled civil society movements, and sidelined pro-democracy opposition representatives.
• On the international stage, although many governments expressed concerns, few took concrete action, fearing the economic repercussions of confronting China.

LESSONS FROM THE MOBILIZATION

Some lessons drawn from the 2019 Hong Kong revolutionary movement:

• The need for strategic unity: The Hong Kong movement brought together a wide variety of actors (students, moderates, radicals, politicians) but lacked coordinated leadership and a common platform. Greater internal cohesion could have strengthened negotiations and preserved the movement’s momentum.
• Building international alliances: Symbolic support is important, but more concrete actions could have been taken to pressure foreign governments to act (targeted sanctions, diplomatic protection for activists, international legal action). Raising the cost of repression, even symbolically, can shift global narratives and increase long-term pressure.
• The importance of economic leverage: Hong Kong’s status as a global financial hub could have been used as leverage to exert pressure (strikes, boycotts, coordinated economic actions), though such initiatives would have involved significant risks and coordination.

SOURCES

• Branigan, T., & Kuo, L. (2020, June 9). How Hong Kong caught fire: the story of a radical uprising. The Guardian.
• Cheung, H., & Hughes, R. (2020, May 21). Why are there protests in Hong Kong? All the context you need. BBC News.
• Chung, H. F. (2020). The evolution of repertoires of contention in Hong Kong: a case study on the anti-extradition law movement. Perspectives chinoises, 2020(2020-3), 61-67.
• Griffiths, J., Cheung, E., & Mok, M., (2019, November 25). Landslide victory for Hong Kong pro-democracy parties in de facto protest referendum. CNN.
• Hong Kong police enter Polytechnic University as siege ends. (2018, November 28). Aljazeera.
• HONG KONG: ‘This is a leader-full movement, run by countless small networks of talented people’. (2020, February 10). CIVIC.
• Kuo, L. (2019, November 14). Hong Kong protests: foreign students start to leave as unrest shifts to universities. The Guardian.
• Kuo, L., Safi, M., Levett C., Scruton, P., Sheehy, F., & Jeffery, S. (2019, November 18). Hong Kong university siege: a visual guide. The Guardian.
• Lo, W.Y.M., & Auld, E. (2022). The role of university leaders in a political crisis: Students’ perspectives from Hong Kong. Higher Education Quarterly, 78(4). 4-19. DOI: 10.1111/hequ.12418
• Pandey, I. (2021, March 16). Hong Kong, Democracy in Peril: Interview with Nathan Law. Harvard International Review.
• Sataline, S. (2022, May 26). How Are They Weapons? That’s Only a Flashlight!’. Wired.
• Thibault, H., et al. (2019, November 8). From Local Trigger to Global Revolt: The Convergence of Struggles Worldwide. Le Monde.