Three handpicked judges presiding over the trial of Jimmy Lai have grilled his defence lawyer about the tycoon’s pledge to “not back down,” despite the 2020 enactment of the Beijing-imposed national security law.
On Thursday, the judges, chosen by Hong Kong’s leader to hear national security cases, pushed back against the defence’s argument that Lai was merely providing “armchair commentary” of global affairs in his past interviews and opinion writing.
Lai, 77, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces under the security law, and a third count of conspiracy to publish seditious materials under colonial-era legislation. He faces life behind bars if convicted.
Prosecutors have alleged that Lai used his now-shuttered Apple Daily newspaper, and his extensive network with foreign politicians, to invite foreign sanctions. They claim that he continued doing so with “indirect means” and under “disguise” after the security law came into force in June 2020.
The prosecution has relied on an online talk show, “Live Chat with Jimmy Lai,” featuring the tycoon and guests mostly made up of foreign politicians and academics, as incriminating evidence.
‘Big crime’
Defence lawyer Robert Pang on Thursday argued that the tycoon was airing “pure commentary” on world affairs when he discussed topics like Taiwan-China relations and the US technological embargo on China, adding that the talk show was “dynamic” and “flowing” in nature.
But Judge Esther Toh asked the lawyer to explain an episode from November 2020, in which Lai said he knew that foreign collusion was a “big crime” and that he would “not back down.”
“[I] know that I will get into big trouble by talking to you, by talking to a lot of people, because this is a collusion with foreigner – this is big crime here – but I must hold on,” Lai told Israeli politician Natan Sharansky during the talk show.
Judges Alex Lee and Susana D’Almada Remedios also chimed in, saying the remark corroborated the accounts of two prosecution witnesses, who previously told the court that Lai would “persist” with his advocacy despite the security law coming into effect.
“If he believed that he would be in big trouble, but he said he would not back down, was that not an expression of determination?” Lee asked.
Pang argued that Lai was merely suggesting he would continue talking to foreigners to garner international support.
Lai “is prepared to take the risk that what he does may be construed the wrong way,” Pang said. “He wasn’t expressing in any way that he was going to break the law.”
‘Simply commenting’
The exchange came after Pang sought to convince the judges that Lai was only analysing international affairs and was not requesting foreign sanctions against Hong Kong or China, as he examined every piece of evidence that prosecutors said they relied on.
The court previously heard that, in another episode of Live Chat with Jimmy Lai, the tycoon said China’s President Xi Jinping was the root cause of the country’s tense relationship with other nations and suggested that things would not improve unless Xi steps down.
“Everyone needs to step down at some point,” Pang told the court. “[Lai] is just commenting on worldly affairs as we would see everyday in a Cha chaan teng,” the lawyer said, referring to the Hong Kong-style cafe where people commonly talk politics.
“Simply commenting on the world situation is something that I hope has not been outlawed yet, because we do it all the time,” he added.
The defence will continue closing arguments on Friday.
Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong’s mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
