Hong Kong pro-democracy tycoon Jimmy Lai recently
pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiring to collude with foreign forces and one count of publishing “seditious” materials. The accusations bring Lai in direct conflict with Hong Kong’s
National Security Law and
sedition law.
Detained since December 2020, Lai is currently serving close to six years for fraud charges and a further 20-month prison sentence for participating in a Tiananmen Square massacre vigil. If Found guilty of all three counts, Lai risk life imprisonment.
The prosecutors allege that Lai leveraged his media business to implicitly request foreign governments to sanction the Hong Kong and Chinese governments, under the pretense of advocating for freedom and democracy. They posit that Lai had political ties with foreign highlights, including former US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, former US Army General Jack Keane, and former Hong Kong Consul General James Cunningham.
Moreover, Lai’s interview with Fox Business in May 2020, where he stated it was “the time to confront China,” along with his remarks to the BBC that he anticipated Donald Trump, then US President, to enforce “really serious sanctions” on Hong Kong and Chinese authorities, are set as key evidence of his alleged subversion.
Furthermore, the prosecution argues that Apple Daily, Lai’s media company, published material aiming to encourage Hong Kong’s public to participate in the
2019 Hong Kong protests. They refer notably to an op-ed published by Lai on Apple Daily, where he urged Hong Kong people to “resist and fight to the end.”
The trial continues this Wednesday and will extend for about 80 days. On December 22, Hong Kong’s High Court concluded that the sedition charge against Lai was within its jurisdiction. Lai’s defence had argued that the prosecution had overrun its six-month time limit to press the charge as per section 11 of the
Crimes Ordinance.
However, the court held that the prosecution had not exceeded the deadline as they contended Lai’s conspiracy to sedition was a continuous act. Finally, the Hong Kong government
commented that all defendants would receive fair trials based on evidence and according to law, it added that it would be inappropriate to comment on Lai’s case.