Jury begins deliberations in landmark UN anti-terrorism trial of 7 Hongkongers accused of 2019 bomb plot
Hong Kong Free Press
The jury in the trial of seven Hongkongers over an alleged bomb plot to kill police officers during the 2019 protests and unrest has begun deliberating their verdict.
The nine jurors – six women and three men – will decide on the verdict for the defendants’ charges laid under the UN (Anti-Terrorism Measures) Ordinance, which is being invoked by prosecutors for the first time in the city.
High Court Judge Judianna Barnes on Tuesday told the jurors to carefully examine all the testimonies and evidence presented during the trial, which began in April and lasted 81 days.
“Let me remind you again, the prosecution has the burden of proof,” Barnes said in Cantonese. “The prosecution have to prove that the defendants are guilty, rather than the defence having to prove they are innocent.”
See also: Hong Kong judge urges jury to consider 2019 protests as context when reaching verdict
The case stemmed from an alleged bomb plot involving the planting of two explosive devices along the route of a rally in Hennessy Road, Wan Chai, on December 8, 2019, aimed at targetting police officers.
Cheung Chun-fu, Cheung Ming-yu, Yim Man-him, Christian Lee, Lai Chun-pong, and Justin Hui have pleaded not guilty to a joint count of “conspiracy to commit bombing of prescribed objects” under the anti-terrorism act. They face life behind bars if convicted.
The six defendants face an alternative charge of “conspiracy to cause explosion with intent to endanger life or property,” punishable by up to 20 years in jail.
They are also charged with “conspiracy to commit murder,” which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Lee faces an additional charge of “possession of arms or ammunition with intent to endanger life,” also punishable by life in jail.
The seventh defendant, Lau Pui-ying, has pleaded not guilty to one count of “conspiracy to provide or collect property to commit terrorist acts,” punishable by up to 14 years in jail.
Barnes told the jurors most of the charges laid against the defendants were conspiracy offences, meaning that they should first ascertain whether a conspiracy existed.
They should consider whether each defendant had knowingly participated in the scheme and whether they intended to carry out the conspiracy, the judge added.
Barnes also reminded the jurors that the first offence under the anti-terrorism act and its alternative charge could not be ruled guilty concurrently.
“Other than [Lau], every defendant is facing more than one charge. You have to consider them independently, that whether the prosecution had established each offence for each defendant,” the judge said.
The deliberations are expected to last for more than a day. The jurors will stay overnight in the High Court and are barred from speaking to anyone other than their fellow jurors over the course of their deliberations.
The nine-member jury in the case must reach a unanimous decision, or a decision agreed on by at least seven members, in order for their verdict to be considered effective. If not, the judge could discharge them and order a retrial before a new panel of jurors.
Bomb plot
During the trial, the court heard testimonies including from three defendant-turned-prosecution witnesses, Wong Chun-keung, Eddie Pang, and David Su.
Prosecutors alleged that the defendants were members of two radical groups – including the “Dragon Slayers” group led by Wong – that had planned the bomb attack during a December 8, 2019 rally organised by the pro-democracy group Civil Human Rights Front. The group disbanded in the wake of the national security law.
Members of Dragon Slayers planned to lure police officers into the vicinity of the two bombs while Su would open fire at police from a nearby building, according to the prosecution.
The bombs could have caused severe casualties to civilians and properties, lead prosecutor Juliana Chow had said.
Protests erupted in June 2019 over a since-axed extradition bill. They escalated into sometimes violent displays of dissent against police behaviour, amid calls for democracy and anger over Beijing’s encroachment. Demonstrators demanded an independent probe into police conduct, amnesty for those arrested and a halt to the characterisation of protests as “riots.”
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
HKFP has an impartial stance, transparent funding, and balanced coverage guided by an Ethics Code and Corrections Policy.
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.