In a recent controversies revolving around Hong Kong’s political landscape, the Hong Kong High Court ruled against activist Jimmy Lai over a challenge regarding the jurisdiction of court to hear the charge of conspiracy to sedition. The court decided that the alleged conspiracy to sedition was an ongoing act. Therefore, the limitation period began after the conspiracy had ceased. This decision was reached on January 2, following a trial that started on December 18.
The defense argued that the six-month time bar, pursuant to section 11 of the Crimes Ordinance, began with the commission of the first substantive offense in line with the conspiracy, but the court contested this claim. The court also disagreed with the defense’s alternate argument that if the limitation period began with the end of the conspiracy, the period had expired before Lai even made his first court appearance.
The court ruled the limitation period for conspiracy charges began at the end of the ongoing act, and the time-bar section works to ensure timely commencement of prosecution. Further, the court said it’s not the prosecution’s duty to ensure that the defendant’s first appearance occurs within this six-month time frame.
Interestingly, Lai faces other charges as well, including collusion with a foreign country to endanger national security and two counts of conspiracies to collude with foreign countries. An attempt to stay proceedings permanently was rejected by the court in the past. Questions were raised surrounding the Chief Executive’s power under Article 44 of the National Security Law to designate judges and whether such actions constituted an abuse of process.
Previous convictions against Lai include fraud for subletting a portion of the Apple Daily building to another building he owned. His sentence for this stands at nearly six years. Additional sentences include a 20-month prison sentence for his participation in a vigil commemorating the victims of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. Last month, Catholic Church leaders from various countries petitioned for Lai’s release.
The arguments made by Lai’s defense challenge the very foundation of Hong Kong’s judicial system, raising questions about the separation of power and the exercise of judicial discretion. As tensions continue to rise, the international legal community will undoubtedly be watching as the events unfold.