Hong Kong lawmaker Holden Chow has insisted he was telling the truth in his testimony against Lam Cheuk-ting, a former pro-democracy legislator on trial over clashes in the legislature in 2019.
Lam appeared at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Monday. He stands accused of assaulting or obstructing pro-Beijing lawmakers Chow, Ben Chan and Elizabeth Quat more than six years ago, when legislators were having a meeting related to the controversial extradition bill.
Lam and six other former pro-democracy lawmakers were charged in the case. Among them, Leung Yiu-chung, Eddie Chu, and Raymond Chan have pleaded guilty, while Kwok Ka-ki and Gary Fan had their charges dropped. Au Nok-hin was handed a bind-over order, meaning he was not convicted but was requested to abide by a good behaviour order.
Lam pleaded not guilty last Friday. He is currently serving a six-year-and-nine-month sentence over a national security conviction linked to unofficial democratic primaries in July 2020.
Chow, a lawmaker from the city’s largest pro-establishment party, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), is alleged by the prosecution to be a victim in the case.
Testifying on Monday morning, Chow confirmed with government prosecutor William Siu that he and other pro-establishment lawmakers escorted Abraham Shek – an older legislator – to a conference room on the morning of May 11, 2019.
After they exited the lift, “anti-China lawmakers” tried to stop Shek from entering the room, Chow said.
In court, the prosecution played videos of chaos inside LegCo’s Conference Room 1, with Shek, then nearly 75, speaking into his wireless microphone in an attempt to start the meeting while pro-democracy lawmakers surrounded him and attempted to grab his microphone.
Chow said Lam was among the lawmakers who did that, and that he also “pulled” Shek.
‘I do not want to fall into your trap’
Representing Lam, barrister Catherine Wong sparred with Chow. She suggested Chow did not personally see Lam doing these acts, saying he was actually too far away.
Wong replayed one of the prosecution’s videos, which showed Chow entering the frame and walking towards the crowd that was surrounding Shek and the pro-democracy lawmakers.
The barrister said that before Chow walked over there, he was seated at the lawmakers’ tables some distance away, which is why the camera did not capture him earlier. She described Chow as “glancing left and right” and not knowing what was going on.
Wong asked Chow for details on how Lam “pulled” Shek, which Chow said he had witnessed. “Pulled what? His arm? His thigh?” Wong asked.
Chow, however, did not respond directly. “I don’t think I can be accurate about which body part,” he said.
He replied that he had “already answered” after Wong asked a few more times.
Wong also said Chow had never referred to Lam pulling Shek or attempting to snatch his microphone during a testimony he gave to police in July 2019, around two months after the incident.
Chow responded that he mentioned Lam doing so in Conference Room 2, which lawmakers moved to after the meeting was suspended in Conference Room 1.
“Let’s talk about Conference Room 1. Did [Lam] snatch the microphone in Conference Room 1?” Wong asked.
Chow replied: “I do not want to fall into your trap.”
Wong also asked Chow if he was testifying this way because of past interactions with opposition lawmakers.
The barrister brought up an incident in 2017, in which pro-democracy lawyers led a vote of no confidence in him. It followed alleged collusion between Chow and then-chief executive Leung Chun-ying, who was being investigated for receiving payment from Australian engineering firm UGL after he became the city’s leader.
Chow, vice-chair of a Legislative Council committee investigating the scandal, was said to have had private discussions with Leung and allowed him to interfere with the investigation.
In response, Chow accused Wong of “slandering” him.
He said he would not reply to questions about the incident as it had already “passed,” adding that the evidence he was giving was based on his memory and knowledge, not any political positions.
‘Non-stop’ talking
The incident on May 11, 2019, took place during a meeting of a LegCo bills committee, which was set up to discuss amendments to Hong Kong’s extradition laws. The government had proposed changes that critics said would effectively allow the extradition of fugitives to mainland China to stand trial.
Besides Chow, the prosecution also summoned two other witnesses: DAB lawmaker Ben Chan, also said to be a victim in the incident, and Ma Shuk-wa, a now-retired Legislative Council secretariat member who witnessed the meeting.
Chan, who testified before Chow, also told the court he was among the pro-establishment lawmakers who escorted Shek to the conference room that morning.
He said his glasses fell off in the corridor during the scuffle on the way to the conference room.
He added that he believed that inside the conference room, Lam was harassing Shek by coming up to him and talking “non-stop.” But Chan said it was too noisy to hear what Lam was saying.
Ma, then a Legislative Council secretary present at the May 2019 meeting, testified in the afternoon.
She said she and her colleagues were responsible for supporting meetings, including record-keeping, with the help of audio recording.
Ma said that they saw on the day that Shek was not able to get to the chairperson’s podium, so a colleague gave him a wireless microphone connected to recording and broadcasting devices.
She also said she did not receive any complaints about Lam’s behaviour at the meeting.
The prosecution finished its case on Monday afternoon, and the defence will begin its arguments on Tuesday.
