The Hong Kong Department of Justice is dissatisfied with the bail granted to Lai Chi-ying and has applied to the Court of Final Appeal for leave to appeal. The case was heard in the Court of Final Appeal today (31) by three judges appointed under the National Security Law: Chief Justice Ma Tao-li and Permanent Judges Li Yi and Zhang Ju-neng. After hearing their arguments in the afternoon, the three judges accepted the appeal of the Department of Justice and granted the application for detention, and Lai Chi-ying was again detained. On December 12, Lai Chi-ying was escorted to court in chains.
One Media founder Lai Chi-ying was granted bail by the High Court to wait at home for a retrial in the two cases against him. Dissatisfied with the granting of bail, the Department of Justice applied for leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (CFA) the following day, and requested that Lai be remanded in custody pending the CFA’s decision. The case was heard at the Court of Final Appeal today (31), and the three judges appointed by the National Security Law: Chief Justice Ma Tao-li, Permanent Judge Li Yi and Zhang Ju-neng, decided whether to accept the Department of Justice’s application. In the afternoon, after hearing their arguments, the three judges accepted the Department of Justice’s appeal and granted the application for detention, meaning that Lai Chi-ying was again detained pending an appeal hearing on Feb. 1.
Lai Chi-ying’s family cries goodbye as he is detained again
According to Apple Daily, after the court announced the decision, the correctional staff immediately approached Lai Chi-ying to escort him. Lai embraced his children one by one to say goodbye and nodded to the pro-democracy activists who came to the court to show their support, while they shouted “Go Jimmy! The company’s main goal is to provide a safe and secure environment for its customers. They shouted “Go Jimmy!” and “Take care!”. Lai Chi-ying’s daughter broke down in tears and was comforted by family and friends. The two sons are discussing with their legal team, looking serious.
Today, on behalf of the Hong Kong government, the Department of Justice continues to send senior assistant criminal prosecutor Chow Tin-hang; while senior barrister Tang Lok-kan represents Lai Chi-ying’s side. In the morning, Lai Chi-ying entered the courtroom accompanied by his lawyers and was seated behind the defense lawyers. In addition to Lai’s wife and children, Apple Daily’s Vice President Chan Pui-man, Chief Editor Lo Wai-kwong, Cardinal Joseph Zen, Cardinal Emeritus, Lee Cheuk-yan, Lam Cheuk-tin, Audrey Eu, League of Social Democrats Leung Kwok-hung and Wong Ho-ming, etc. Ho Chun-yan and Lam Cheuk-tin were present in the courtroom.
Anger at the results of the final court trial Hong Kong University called no justice
The case of Lai Chi-ying has aroused the concern of Hong Kong people, beforehand, it is believed that the Court of Final Appeal will uphold the original verdict, that is, Lai Chi-ying home bail pending trial. After learning the result, netizens shouted “no justice”, “the rule of law is dead”. Some people commented, “Lai Chi-ying bail case, is the litmus test of Hong Kong’s judicial independence or not. Disappointed, this touchstone has been weathered…” Others pointed out that the facts are in front of us, the Hong Kong judiciary has been dominated by the autocrats! Even some eunuchs at the gate can control the judges of final appeal! “The law in Hong Kong can no longer uphold justice, but has been reduced to a tool for mediocre officials to play with the public, politics has completely overridden the law.”
Some Hong Kong people also said that this trial is a political persecution, Hong Kong fell into the abyss of the abyss, thanks to the judges; 70-year-old Lai Chi-ying no criminal record, no murder and arson, are not allowed to bail, too unfair! The authorities are doing a perverse thing and want to add to the crime! If you do not do what is right, you will be killed.
The Department of Justice implies that Lai Chi-ying’s bail is detrimental to public interest
In the morning, Chow Tin-hang, representing the government, said that the appeal application mainly involved two levels: first, whether Judge Li Yun-teng’s earlier decision to grant bail to Lai Chi-ying was “final”; second, whether Judge Li Yun-teng correctly interpreted Article 42 of the Hong Kong version of the National Security Law when considering the decision to grant bail to Lai Chi-ying. Chow argued that both involve important legal points and public interest.
Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma responded that the first issue did not involve the National Security Law, but was a general matter. Justice Li also said that if the decision was not final, whether the Court of Final Appeal could hear the appeal under section 31(b) of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance was a matter of whether the Court of Final Appeal had jurisdiction to deal with the application.
Chow Tin-hang stressed that the Department of Justice’s current appeal is mainly about the second part, that is, the part involving national security, and said that if the prosecution can not appeal the bail decision of the National Security Law, it will harm the public interest, and contrary to the legislative intent of the National Security Law. Ma Daoli countered that even if the public interest is involved, if the court does not have the authority to deal with, but also can not help.
Zhou Tianxing said that the Hong Kong court in the interpretation of national security law, must take into account the legislative intent of the NPC Standing Committee. Article 42(2) of the National Security Law says that for criminal suspects and defendants, bail shall not be granted unless the judge has good reason to believe that they will not continue to commit acts against national security. Chow argued that Judge Lee Yun-teng misunderstood the legislative intent of the law.
Ma said that in cases not involving the national security law, bail can be presumed under the premise of presumed innocence, but the national security law significantly undermines the common law premise of presumed innocence, making bail available only unless specified conditions are met. Zhou agreed, but reiterated that the rationale behind the NSA is an important purpose of the law.
The judge may not grant bail unless there are “good reasons” to believe that the defendant will not repeat the crime, harass witnesses or abscond, according to the law.
Li Yi asked, “If he has sufficient reason to believe that he will not repeat the crime and grant bail, why can not consider the bail conditions as a factor?” Zhou said, because of the legislative intent of the National Security Law, emphasizing that violation of the National Security Law is a serious crime, can be sentenced to life imprisonment, and cited the example of murder can be sentenced to life imprisonment, the court for murderers generally will not be granted bail.
Zhou Tianxing continued to say that the court in considering the approval of the National Security Law bail threshold should be higher, said “once can not afford the National Security Law defendants to abscond on bail or repeat offenders”, and the judge in considering whether the defendant has a reason not to repeat offenders, bail conditions should not be a factor to consider.
Support for democracy becomes a reason for Lai Chi-ying to be charged
The Department of Justice said in its written brief that Lai Chi-ying has actively supported the pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong since 2014 and has opposed the Communist Party of China and the Hong Kong government. Since May 2020, Lai has opened a Twitter account and actively posted comments that were followed by several foreign dignitaries, with more than 96,000 comments appearing on his account from May 22 to Dec. 1.
The Department of Justice also said that before the implementation of the National Security Law, especially since June last year during the anti-China incident, Lai Chi-ying has repeatedly participated in and requested foreign governments or agencies to sanction Chinese Communist Party and Hong Kong officials or dignitaries, or to pass measures that are unfavorable to China or Hong Kong (Editor’s note: Lai Chi-ying pushed foreign governments to introduce bills to sanction Chinese and Hong Kong officials who undermine Hong Kong’s democracy and autonomy. ); Lai Chi-ying tweeted, met with U.S. dignitaries, was interviewed by overseas media, and published opinion pieces expressing his views. After the National Security Law came into effect, Lai continued to be interviewed and filmed interview programs.
The Department of Justice said that in addition to the National Security Law and fraud, Lai Chi-ying is also charged with other crimes, and once he is convicted, he is bound to face a long period of imprisonment, so the court must consider the above background when considering whether to grant him bail; and said Lai Chi-ying has the risk of absconding on bail and repeating the crime; and it is difficult for the police to ensure that he stays at home 24 hours a day, and if he leaves home without permission, it is difficult to find and take action unless the police find him in time.
As for reoffending during the bail period, the Department of Justice believes that the 24-hour home bail condition will not ensure that he will not reoffend, saying that based on Lai’s criminal methods and his “radical ideologies”, as well as the fact that Lai runs a major media, it is not difficult for him to continue to commit acts against national security through others; in addition, Lai is free to meet with different people in his apartment, so the Department of Justice believes that during the bail period, Lai will continue to violate national security laws through his subordinates or others.
Defense says the Court of Final Appeal has no authority to deal with the Court of First Instance’s bail decision
Deng Leqin, a senior barrister representing Lai, said that the Court of Final Appeal does not have judicial authority to deal with the Court of First Instance’s bail decision, and there is a case that has been written long ago that the bail decision can be overturned, so “granting bail” or “not granting bail” are not “final decisions”, and the case was written by one of the three judges on the bench this time, Li Yi.
Mr. Tang pointed out that the National Security Law does not and will not affect the content of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Ordinance, and that the bail decision granted by Judge Li Yun-teng earlier was certainly reasonable. For the application for appeal of Article 42 of the National Security Law, Deng Leqin said that Judge Li Yunten in the case of Tang Yingjie has been thoroughly analyzed the law, the justification is sufficient, but also in line with the legislative purpose of the National Security Law, and pointed out that the argument put forward by the Department of Justice today that the judge in considering the national security charges bail, can not take into account the conditions of bail as a factor, the argument is extremely deviated from the traditional considerations.
Deng Leqin accused the party that the national security law case bail application is considered in two steps, one is according to the national security law Article 42, the second is according to the normal bail provisions, only the second step is assumed to be subject to bail, he said the defense does not agree with this statement, and the judge Lee Yun-teng has been considered in accordance with Article 42, can not be considered that he made a mistake.
For the Department of Justice to apply for temporary detention Lai pending trial, Deng Leqin pointed out that according to the provisions of the Court of Final Appeal does not have the power to make a decision. Ma Dao Li questioned, if only the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal has the right, there seems to be a legal loophole. The Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal are the only ones with the authority to make decisions. Deng Leqin continued to say that the cancellation of Lai Chi-ying bail will affect freedom; freedom is important, as soon as possible hearing is not the solution; the High Court has fully considered the prosecution’s arguments before granting its bail, the Court of Final Appeal has no basis to overturn.
On December 3, Lai Chi-ying, 73, was charged with fraud and denied bail after his arraignment; he was later charged with colluding with a foreign power to endanger national security. 23, Lai successfully applied for bail on the condition that he would be released on HK$10 million, and that he would not be allowed to request, directly or indirectly, foreign governments to sanction China and Hong Kong, meet with foreign officials, receive any interviews, or publish articles and messages in newspapers or online. He must not leave his residence except to attend court and report to the police, and must not leave Hong Kong and must surrender his travel documents.
Recent Comments