The Last Night of the Pillar of Shame — How HKU Removed the "Pillar of Shame" in 2021

Wild-history section · Module 14 · Monument-fate archive. This article attributes statements by the strength of their evidence and places different parties' accounts side by side without adjudicating. Living individuals are referred to by "surname + Mr./Ms." or by their commonly used artist name. This account is based on 2021–2023 media reporting, HKU's official statements, and the parties' public statements.

---

One-line summary: In the late night of 22 December 2021 into the early morning of 23 December, the Pillar of Shame, which had stood on the HKU campus for 24 years^※, was dismantled by workers and removed in a container without prior public notice to the sculptor. HKU's official position cited "legal risk" under the Crimes Ordinance; the Danish artist Mr. Jens Galschiøt said the work was his private property and called the removal "a crime against democracy."

---

# What is the Pillar of Shame? How long did it stand at HKU?

The Pillar of Shame is a bronze sculpture created by Danish artist Jens Galschiøt to commemorate those who died in the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown^※. The work stands roughly 8 metres^※ tall and is composed of 50 twisted human bodies stacked together, with an inscription at the base reading "the old cannot kill the young forever," rendered mainly in black to evoke mourning.

In 1997^※, the sculpture first appeared at the annual June 4th vigil in Victoria Park, and was subsequently moved onto campus with arrangements by the HKU students' union. In 1998, the Hong Kong University Students' Union (HKUSU) held a referendum and voted 1,629 to 561^※ to place the sculpture permanently on the podium of the Haking Wong Building; for the following 24 years, the students' union held an annual cleaning ceremony for it ahead of June 4th.

---

# Before the removal: the "five-day deadline" and Galschiøt's lawyer's letter

According to HKFP^※, HKU's legal representatives sent a letter in early October 2021 demanding that the sculpture be removed by 5 p.m. on 13 October^※ — a deadline of only five days. In a public statement on 8 October^※, Mr. Galschiøt said he had learned of the removal demand only through media reports and had "received no official notification"; he stated that "all my sculptures displayed abroad remain, in principle, my personal property," and warned that after 24 years the sculpture was fragile and that non-professional handling would cause irreparable damage.

On 12 October, his lawyer wrote to HKU^※ asserting Mr. Galschiøt's legal ownership, stating he was "willing and prepared to remove it personally," and requesting a three-month extension. However, according to HKFP^※, his representatives did not receive a reply from HKU's legal team until 24 December — the day after the sculpture had already been removed.

---

# What happened that night? How did the removal proceed?

At around 11 p.m. on 22 December 2021, dozens of workers wearing yellow safety helmets arrived at the Haking Wong Building podium on the HKU campus. According to HKFP's on-site report^※, security staff erected yellow barricades around the sculpture and sealed off the area with white screens and tape, blocking the view of onlookers and reporters; power tools and chains could be heard running continuously at the site.

The following is a timeline of that night's key events as corroborated by media reports:

The operation took place late at night, on the eve of Christmas. It fell during the students' winter break, and few witnesses were present. Photos and video from the scene show workers wrapping the sculpture in protective material and lifting it in sections into the container.

---

# What reasons did HKU give?

HKU Council's official statement of 23 December 2021^※ set out three reasons:

First, legal risk: "Recent advice given to the University is that continued display of the statue would render the University in violation of the Crimes Ordinance, a piece of colonial-era legislation," with the specific provision cited elsewhere as Section 10 (concerning seditious publications and items).

Second, safety: the statement referred to "potential safety issues arising from ageing of the statue," suggesting concerns about structural safety if display continued.

Third, ownership: the Council stated explicitly that "no individual or organisation has ever obtained approval from the University to display the statue on campus, and the University has the right to take appropriate action to deal with it at any time."^※

The statement also said the university had decided to "put the statue in storage" and would "continue to seek legal advice on appropriate follow-up action." Mr. Arthur Li, then Council Chairman, subsequently said that ownership of the sculpture was "not entirely clear, and we are still looking into it."

---

# How did Mr. Galschiøt respond? What are the different parties' positions on the ownership dispute?

Mr. Galschiøt issued statements to several media outlets. According to Al Jazeera^※, he described the removal as "a crime against democracy," and said: "It's a way of oppression — telling people don't do anything, don't talk about the massacre."

On the ownership question, Mr. Galschiøt maintained that the sculpture was his private property; according to VOA Chinese^※, he estimated that if the sculpture were damaged, remaking it would cost roughly €1.2 million (about HK$10 million). He also said he had travelled to HKU in person in 2013 to carry out maintenance on the sculpture, and considered this to reflect HKU's acknowledgment of its permanent display.

The positions of the different parties, placed side by side:

This archive does not adjudicate any party's ownership claim; as of the time of writing (June 2026), the related legal process has not reached a publicly reported final resolution.

---

# What was the context for this event? How does it relate to the dissolution of the HKU students' union?

The December 2021 removal was part of a wider series of changes at Hong Kong universities following the implementation of the National Security Law in 2020. According to HKFP^※, HKU had already cut official ties with the HKU Students' Union (HKUSU) on 30 April 2021, citing "national security legal risk"; that July, following statements by union members about an incident in which a police officer was injured on 1 July, HKU further suspended all contact. From then on, the students' union lost management authority over the Haking Wong Building podium, the annual cleaning ceremony for the Pillar of Shame that the union had traditionally held was interrupted, and the sculpture's practical caretaker effectively disappeared.

HKU's first demand to remove the sculpture, in October 2021, came only a few months after the union was cut off; the removal itself, in December, was carried out during the Christmas break, late at night. Several media outlets reported on and commented on the deliberateness of this timing.

---

# What happened to the sculpture afterward? What were the developments in 2023?

HKU's official statement said the sculpture would be "put in storage," without disclosing a specific location. According to a May 2023 report by The Art Newspaper^※, the sculpture had been stored since December 2021 at HKU's Kadoorie Centre for agricultural research in Yuen Long.

On 5 May 2023, Hong Kong national security police, citing an "incitement to subversion" case, executed a warrant and seized the sculpture as evidence^※, removing it from the Kadoorie Centre. Mr. Galschiøt's statement described the seizure as "shocking" and said the sculpture was being "used as evidence against Hong Kong's democracy movement"; he later said he suspected an arrest warrant had been issued against him, and authorities declined to respond directly.

---

# Does this mark the end of the Pillar of Shame as a symbol of HKU student activism?

As a physical object, the Pillar of Shame, which stood at HKU for 24 years, no longer exists at its original site; the former podium was subsequently converted into a seating area. Mr. Galschiøt later announced he was opening the sculpture to replication, waiving commercial copyright restrictions on condition that any profits go entirely to supporting Hong Kong's democracy movement. According to Wikipedia^※, replicas have subsequently appeared in various places, and overseas Hong Konger communities have continued to use its imagery and banners at annual June 4th vigils. Whether this constitutes an "end" is a matter on which parties differ; this archive presents the factual record without rendering a verdict.

---

# Comparison of accounts

Note on masking: Living individuals are referred to as "surname + Mr./Ms."; current HKU management is referred to by title, without names. "Jens Galschiøt" is his commonly used name and is reproduced as is. Each party's statements are presented faithfully according to their sources; this archive does not adjudicate legal liability or ownership.

---