The case was trivial enough, at least at the start: Standing trial was a group of persons charged for obstructing traffic on a sidewalk based on a law that aimed at preventing sales booths springing up everywhere in Hong Kong and checking the free movement of pedestrians.

The Forum was also in style with the offence: A local court led by circuit judge Symon Wong Yu-wing, well versed in cases like this. But if you cast your eyes around in the hall, you discovered quickly that the case maybe was not so trivial.

On the one side sat two of the most competent counsels from the Hong Kong prosecuting authority. On the defendants side sat two of the areas most experienced barristers. And in the audience sat a substantial international mustering of diplomats.

Protest
The explanation is simple enough: The disputed sidewalk is not just any sidewalk, but is located outside Beijing's liaison office in Hong Kong. And despite the law being used, the defendants were not street vendors. They belong to Falun Gong, a spiritual movement that combines [teachings based on the principle, "Truthfulness, Compassion, Forbearance"] with traditional [qigong] exercises. The movement claims to have tens of millions practitioners in China, [...]where its adherents are subjected to very harsh persecution.

Hong Kong however has its own code of laws, which Beijing has promised to respect in accordance with the guarantee "one country, two systems" - the foundation on which the British colony five years ago was transferred back to Chinese control. Here Falun Gong is legal, and here 16 of the practitioners this spring used the opportunity to protest against Beijing's treatment of their fellow-believers in China.

Falun Gong itself claims that more than 1600 of these are dead in Chinese captivity after the movement was outlawed in 1999, a number it is impossible to confirm.

"Unfair"
The demonstrators themselves claimed to have the right on their side. But Chinese authorities and Hong Kong police have a different opinion. On 14th March the 16 were detained, and recently judge Wong found them guilty of obstructing the sidewalk - a verdict that has already been appealed to a higher court.

"It's shocking and deeply unfair," said Sharon Xu, a local Falun Gong practitioner who followed the case. "Neither police nor the prosecution could show that anybody had been hindered in walking the sidewalk," she said and pointed out that the demonstrators only occupied a minimum of space - seven square meters out of a total area of 140 square meters. "The police and the authorities take away our right to protest, while at the same time they claim to protect the code of law," she continued. She thought the verdict in the district court would harm Hong Kong and in a longer timeframe would serve to destroy the area's still good reputation for legal protection and freedoms.

Acid test
Hong Kong's treatment of its own nearly 500 Falun Gong practitioners is regarded as an acid test, a barometer if one likes, for how these freedoms are protected.

"The verdict in the district court is important also for other groups which are not tolerated by Beijing," says Sharon Xu. "At the very least, this situation forms part of the background for the big international interest in this case against the Falun Gong demonstrators. If the prosecution wins this case, it will be easier to stifle other forms of protest later," she said.

The political authority, which in great part is designated by Beijing, has so far been cautious about restraining the right to protest, feeling it was important to preserve Hong Kong's image as a constitutional government in order to attract international business.

Constant pressure
On the other hand Hong Kong is under constant pressure from Beijing, which does not want to give groups like Falun Gong the right to appeal, and especially not when it happens right in the face of Chinese delegates or leaders.

In the worst case scenario, the protest activity might erode the foundation for Falun Gong in the former colony, because if the pressure from Beijing becomes too strong, the movement could simply be outlawed here, like it is in China.

Sharon Xu doesn't look at this as a dilemma: "We intend to tell people the truth, and trying to appease Beijing will in the long run not serve Hong Kong's interests, she said.