Hong Kong activist tells national security trial he never spoke to or met media mogul Jimmy Lai
Hong Kong Free Press
A Hong Kong activist allegedly instructed by media mogul Jimmy Lai to call for international sanctions against the city and China has testified that he never spoke to or met the mogul.
Andy Li, who is charged alongside Lai but is testifying against him in the high-profile national security trial, said on Wednesday that he had never directly communicated with him via any means.
Prosecutors alleged that Li, a core member of an international advocacy group “Fight for Freedom, Stand with Hong Kong” (SWHK), carried out Lai’s instructions to request foreign governments to impose sanctions and other “hostile acts” against the city and China.
“I have never met Lai Chee-ying,” Li said in Cantonese, referring to the mogul’s Chinese name as the defence began cross-examining Li on Wednesday.
Marc Corlett, one of Lai’s defence lawyers, asked the witness if he had any communication with the mogul via phone, video calls, online messages and other means.
“None whatsoever,” Li said.
Li has pleaded guilty to conspiring to collude with foreign forces under the Beijing-imposed national security law and has agreed to testify for the prosecution.
Lai, 76, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiring to collude with foreign forces and one count of conspiring to publish “seditious” materials.
‘Bridging loans’
The defence on Wednesday – the 57th day of the trial – asked Li to explain his connection with Mark Simon, Lai’s personal assistant, and paralegal Chan Tsz-wah, another defendant-turned- prosecution-witness in the case.
Prosecutors alleged that Simon was Lai’s agent in approving and providing financial support to SWHK, and that Chan was a middleman who passed on Lai’s instructions to Li.
Li said he only met Simon once in September 2019, when US senator Rick Scott made a visit to the city during the height of the pro-democracy protests and unrest.
Corlett argued that Simon had only given suggestions on logistical arrangements and the topics to be discussed in that meeting, and that there were no instructions about inviting sanctions from the US.
Li said he agreed, adding that his only other exchanges with Simon were about “bridging loans” that facilitated SWHK in carrying out global advertising campaigns between June and August in 2019.
Given that the crowdfunding platform used required a US-bank account to receive proceeds, Simon – an American – helped by handling US$1.8 million (HK$14 million) raised by SWHK, the court previously heard.
Corlett argued that transactions between Simon, Li, and a trust account that SWHK activists set up to maintain the fund in the US were not Simon’s donations, and that Simon was merely “giving back” the money he handled, to which Li also agreed.
The defence lawyer also referred to emails between Li and “T” – Chan’s pseudonym – dated September 2019. He said that Simon was not the only person that SWHK considered when planning how the money would be handled.
Li said the group had considered himself and a person named Kannis Ko as a potential handlers of the money before deciding on Simon.
Corlett also suggested that Li did not discuss every aspect of his activism with Chan despite the pair sharing a “mutual interest in the pro-democracy movement.” Li agreed.
‘Decentralised’ group
Separately, Corlett referred Li to his previous testimony in which he described SWHK as a “loosely defined” organisation with no official membership structure or charter.
Li said SWHK was initially a slogan for the first global advertising campaign in June 2019 and that the group only adopted the slogan as its label from July that year, when they needed a group name for the second advertising campaign.
But Li said the label was open to various interpretations and spin-offs because activists could identify with SWHK at any given time or at specific events that they wanted to participate in.
“In other words, it was down to an individual level and an event level,” Li said, explaining how activists at the time identified with SWHK.
“Sorry if I gave a cranky answer, but it was a decentralised movement at that time, and that was the dynamics [of SWHK] as I recalled.”
Corlett called SWHK a “grassroots crowdfunded advocacy group,” which Li agreed.
But Alex Lee, one of the three designated national security judges presiding over Lai’s trial, questioned Corlett’s description.
“I just wonder, you got HK$3 million savings at the age when you were 20-odd, would you describe yourself as grassroot?” Lee asked. Li said he had never thought about this “problem.”
Corlett suggested that there was no formal leadership in SWHK. Li agreed, but added that “the opinions of active members” tended to be prominent.
“You certainly could not dictate other members about what they should do,” the lawyer said.
Li said he could not, adding that SWHK members would discuss among themselves about how to conduct its campaigns.
The trial continues on Thursday.
When Lai’s trial began in December last year, he had already spent more than 1,000 days in custody. The mogul could spend his life behind bars if convicted under the security law.
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
