Retired pro-establishment lawmaker Abraham Shek, testifying at the trial of ex-colleague Lam Cheuk-ting, has said that the former pro-democracy legislator posed no threat to him during a Legislative Council (LegCo) scuffle in 2019.
Lam, a former Democratic Party lawmaker, appeared at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts on Tuesday.
He faces charges of assaulting or obstructing pro-Beijing legislators, including Ben Chan and Holden Chow, during a chaotic meeting related to the controversial extradition bill more than six years ago.
Shek’s testimony contradicted the evidence given by Chan and Chow, who testified for the prosecution one day earlier.
The pair, who belong to the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong (DAB), told the court on Monday that they and other pro-establishment lawmakers were protecting Shek, who was tasked with chairing the bills committee meeting, on the morning of May 11, 2019.
Shek was 74 at the time and suffering from heart problems, the court heard. Chan and Chow said they were shielding him because pro-democracy lawmakers, including Lam, were harassing him and stopping him from holding the meeting.
Now retired, Shek took the witness stand on Tuesday. Testifying for the defence, he disputed the prosecution’s case that Lam was among the lawmakers who had attempted to snatch his microphone.
On Monday and Tuesday, the court watched footage showing Lam standing behind Shek as the elderly politician was surrounded by other lawmakers, LegCo staff, and reporters taking photos. In the footage, Lam was seen talking to Shek amid the chaos and reached out to touch his arm.
Shek said he did not feel there was “danger” coming from the side where Lam and another pro-democracy lawmaker, Kwok Ka-ki, who was also captured in the video grabbing Shek’s arm, were standing.
“It was merely from the side of Eddie Chu, Gary Fan and Au Nok-hin,” Shek said, referring to three other pro-democracy lawmakers who were seen in the video trying to climb over him and snatch his microphone.
“I [did] not feel any threat apart from [from their] side,” the retired lawmaker added.
Chu, Fan, and Au were also charged in the case. Chu pleaded guilty, Fan had his charges dropped, while Au was handed a bind-over order, meaning he was not convicted but was required to be on good behaviour.
Lam was the only one who pleaded not guilty.
‘His duty as a colleague’
Shek told the court that Lam had actually spoken to him a day or two before the LegCo meeting, telling him to be careful about his health, warning that there would be commotion then.
The retired lawmaker also said that Lam had touched his arm and asked if he was alright amid the commotion.
The action was caught on the footage played in court, but Lam’s words were not captured in the audio.
When Lam was testifying on Monday, government prosecutor William Siu suggested that Lam’s physical contact – which he alleged lasted 24 seconds – was an attempt to help other lawmakers snatch his microphone, a claim Lam denied.
Shek confirmed his former colleague’s testimony, saying that when Lam touched him, he was not doing so with any force.
Catherine Wong, the barrister representing Lam, asked Shek if he believed Lam was fulfilling his duties as a lawmaker at the meeting that day.
“I do not know whether he is doing his duty as a Legislative Council [member], but definitely he was doing his duty as a colleague and enquiring about my well-being,” he said.
After Wong finished examining Shek, Siu took his turn to question him.
He asked whether Shek was aware that opposition lawmakers wanted to “do their utmost” to stop the passing of the extradition bill.
“The answer is yes, and also, they have a right to object,” he said, adding that he, too, was against the bill, but could accept it after amendments had been made.
Answering Siu’s question about whether he was aware that pro-democracy lawmakers wanted to stop him from leading the meeting that day, Shek also said yes.
“I will not have entered that morning with a ring of protectors [if I did not],” he replied.
‘Truth is of the essence’
As the trial stretched past 5.30pm, beyond the normal court hours, Siu told Shek to respond succinctly, saying several times that the former lawmaker had not been answering his questions.
According to the prosecutor, Shek previously said he was sympathetic to Lam because the pro-democracy lawmaker had been prosecuted by the government – upon which Shek interjected.
“Mr Prosecutor, time is not important. It is not of the essence. Truth is of the essence,” he said.
“I believe in forgiveness… the law must be fair. If he’s done something wrong, he should be punished. But I’m here as a witness to tell you exactly what happened, how it happened,” Shek added. “I cannot simply answer yes or no.”
Shek also disputed Siu when he suggested that his memory of the incident might be blurry.
“I wouldn’t say blurry. I have a very good memory,” the 80-year-old said.
Lam testified on Tuesday morning, during which he denied preventing Shek from holding the meeting.
He said that he was only concerned that the meeting was occurring under chaotic conditions and that he told Shek to pause the meeting because he could not hear what was going on.
The defendant confirmed that he had seen Fan attempt to snatch Shek’s microphone.
Siu suggested that Lam agreed with Fan’s behaviour, which was denied by the defendant.
When asked why he did not stop Fan, Lam said that if Siu knew their backgrounds, he would know that Fan would not listen to him. He added that Fan had left the Democratic Party in a manner that was “not very ideal.”
Fan was a co-founder of Neo Democrats, a localist party that split from the Democratic Party in 2010.
“You keep saying I should have told him. [But] it’s not practical and it could not have been done,” Lam said in Cantonese.
The case was adjourned to October 30 for the prosecution and the defence to make closing arguments. The verdict is tentatively set for November 6.
