The court also rejected the Department of Justice’s application to appeal the bail decision to the Court of Final Appeal. Although the court imposed relatively harsh bail conditions, Lai Chi-ying is suspected of a number of felonies, especially after the National Security Law came into effect, but still in the eyes of the law, recklessly “badmouthing” the National Security Law, begging for foreign intervention in Hong Kong, sanctions against the state, and even backed by foreign forces, his risk of absconding on bail is very high, the High Court’s decision to allow Lai Chi-ying bail is not in line with the law and reasoning, the community feels unbelievable. The court’s sloppy bail criteria and lax approval have led to the recent flight of many criminals involved in serious crimes, which has undermined the good rule of law environment in Hong Kong. This is an outrageous reality, which shows that judicial reform is urgent, so that the rule of law and justice in Hong Kong will not continue to suffer.
Lai Chi-ying’s two previous applications for bail were denied, and the judge who heard the case took into account the risk of Lai Chi-ying absconding and committing further crimes. The High Court granted bail to Lai Chi-ying on $10 million in cash, plus a personnel guarantee, and he was required to report to the police station three times a week during the bail period. Lai also had to promise not to meet with foreign government officials in any form, accept any form of interview including television and online social media, or publish articles directly or indirectly requesting foreign sanctions and participation in hostilities. These costly and restrictive bail conditions imposed by the High Court itself indicate that the risk of Lai Chi-ying absconding on bail is extremely high.
After the implementation of the National Security Law in late June this year, Lai Chi-ying’s illegal actions of colluding with foreign forces against China and Hong Kong were not restrained. He repeatedly published articles and gave interviews through social media and his Apple Daily in an attempt to incite others or foreign countries to confront and sanction the Chinese and Hong Kong governments.
According to the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, the court may deny bail if it believes the defendant will fail to report on time, commit crimes while on bail, interfere with witnesses and obstruct justice. Article 42 of Hong Kong’s National Security Law even specifically provides that “No bail shall be granted to a suspect or defendant unless the judge has good reason to believe that he will not continue to commit acts against national security.” The key point is “sufficient reason.”
After his arrest and release on bail in August, Lai Chi-ying has intensified his “chorus” with foreign anti-China politicians, colluding with foreign forces to meddle in Hong Kong affairs and confront the Chinese government, and nakedly begging foreign or overseas forces to sanction Hong Kong and China. If the crime is serious, it is punishable by life imprisonment or more than 10 years of imprisonment. Now the High Court has granted bail to Lai Chi-ying, which is clearly in conflict with the relevant laws and national security laws.
While Li Zhiying was still in scabbard, Western politicians kept talking about the case and making accusations. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence glorified Li Zhiying as a “hero of democracy and freedom,” and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo even called for his “immediate release. It is an open secret that Lai Chi-ying is the chief agent of external forces in Hong Kong. External forces openly interfere with the administration of justice in Hong Kong and support Lai Chi-ying to cry for justice. The High Court, in allowing Lai Chi-ying to be released on bail, obviously underestimated the risk of his absconding.
Recently, there have been many cases of absconding on bail, many of which are suspected of violating national security laws or involved in serious crimes such as rioting during the legislative amendment controversy, with the assistance of overseas organizations. The court has not fully considered the risk of absconding on bail and has been too lenient in handling bail applications, which has been much criticized; what is more criticized is that the court does not learn from the lessons and mend the fold, so that the cases of absconding on bail are repeated. The fact that Lai Chi-ying was released on bail shows that judicial reform must be carried out as soon as possible to plug the loopholes in the bail system in order to manifest the justice of the rule of law.
Recent Comments