Background
The case arose from the 2019 social unrest due to the proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation Amendment Bill and the later enactment of the Hong Kong National Security Law (NSL) on 30 June 2020.
On 28 February 2020, Jimmy Lai, along with former Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China chairman Lee Cheuk-yan and former Democratic Party chairman Yeung Sum, were arrested by the Hong Kong police at their homes. They were accused of participating in the illegal assembly on 31 August 2019. Lai was also charged with criminal intimidation for allegedly threatening a newspaper reporter on 4 June 2017. [7] [8]
On 18 April 2020, the Hong Kong police arrested Lai on charges of unlawful assembly, alleging he participated in unauthorised assemblies on 18 August, 1 October, and 29 October 2019. [8]
In July 2020, in an interview with Next Magazine, Lai criticised the CCP's enactment of the Hong Kong National Security Law and publicly denounced Xi Jinping, the general secretary of the CCP Central Committee. On 10 August 2020, the Hong Kong Police National Security Department arrested Jimmy Lai and six others, including Lai's sons Lai Kin-yan and Lai Yiu-yan, as well as four then-senior executives of Next Media Group, including CEO Cheung Kim-hung, Executive Director Wong Wai-keung, COO and CFO Chow Tat-kuen, and Animation General Manager Ng Tat-kwong. The police also issued arrest warrants for Jimmy Lai's private secretary, Mark Simon. On the same day, the police dispatched nearly 200 officers to search the Next Media building in Tseung Kwan O for more than eight hours. [9]
Trial
Stay of proceedings applied
Before trial, Lai applied for a stay of proceedings on the basis of alleged lack of an independent and impartial tribunal and perceived political interference, which the court dismissed. The defendants also challenged Count 1 as time-barred, which the court ruled the charge was not time-barred and refused an application to re-open that ruling. [3]
National People's Congress interpretation of the Hong Kong National Security Law for the first time
Lai initially wanted to hire Tim Owen KC for his case, which on 19 October 2022, the chief judge of the High Court Jeremy Poon approved Tim Owen's participation in the case. The Department of Justice appealed the decision to the Court of Final Appeal, which rejected the appeal on 28 November. Subsequently, the Hong Kong government requested an interpretation from the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, with the question of whether an overseas solicitor or barrister who is not qualified to practise generally in Hong Kong participate by any means in the handling of work in cases concerning offence that endanger the national security of China. On December 30, the Standing Committee of the 13th National People's Congress of China interpreted Articles 14 and 47 of the NSL, specifying that when there is a dispute regarding whether overseas lawyers or barristers without full local practice qualifications can participate in national security cases, the Hong Kong courts should obtain a certificate from the Chief Executive, or that the Committee for Safeguarding National Security of Hong Kong should make a judgment. [11] [12] [13]
Lai then filed for judicial review in the High Court, requesting the Department of Justice to declare that the interpretation of the Basic Law by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress did not affect the court's earlier decision to allow Tim Owen to participate in his case. He also claimed that the Committee for Safeguarding National Security's recommendation to the Immigration Department to refuse to grant him a visa was an overreach of the powers of the NSL. On 19 May 2023, the Chief Judge of the High Court rejected the application, stating that the court had no jurisdiction over the work of the Committee for Safeguarding National Security. Lai then appealed the court's decision, while also claiming that the government's obstruction of Tim Owen's coming to Hong Kong to defend him was "persecution" and "out of malice," and applied to terminate the hearing. On 29 May 2023, the application was unanimously rejected. [14] [15]
Non-jury trial
In August 2022, the Secretary for Justice Paul Lam, in accordance with Article 46 of the NSL and for the purpose of protecting state secrets, announced that no jury would be set up for the case due to its "foreign-related factors". [16] [17]
Decision and judgment
The court identified the core issues as whether there was an agreement to publish seditious publications during the Count 1 period (1 April 2019 to 24 June 2021), and whether there were agreements to request foreign sanctions/blockade/hostile activities after the NSL’s enactment.
The court convicted Lai and the corporate defendants on Count 1 and Count 2, and convicted Lai on Count 3. [3] [5] [6]
The case was adjourned to 12 January 2026 for mitigation, with sentencing to be handed down at a later date. [18]
This page is based on this
Wikipedia article Text is available under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
