Jailed media tycoon Jimmy Lai has told his national security trial that he believed the UK had a “moral responsibility” to lead international support of Hong Kong, but denied that he requested specific policy measures other than granting Hongkongers the right of abode in the country.
Hong Kong media tycoon and founder of Apple Daily newspaper Jimmy Lai (centre) leaves the Kowloon City police station in Hong Kong on February 28, 2020, after being arrested on the suspicion of taking part in an unauthorised assembly on August 31, 2019. Photo: Isaac Lawrence/AFP.
Lai, 77, on Wednesday denied that he was seeking the UK, which governed Hong Kong until 1997 when the city returned to Chinese rule, to engage in hostile activities against China and the city.
Giving evidence for the 20th day, a year after his trial began, Lai was explaining comments made in an interview series called “Live Chat with Jimmy Lai” from September 2020.
“The British government has the moral responsibility to, you know, grant us the right of abode in England and that’s what I meant,” the Apple Daily founder testified.
The court heard that in the interview, which also featured British rights activist Benedict Rogers, Lai said the UK, as the “old colonial government,” should make the world “pay attention to Hong Kong at this time of disaster.”
Lai pushed back against suggestions that he was asking for specific measures from the UK after a judge noted that Rogers had said Britain was stepping up its response to a Beijing-imposed security law, such as by suspending its extradition agreement with the city.
Lai, a British citizen, said he simply wanted the world to be concerned about the situation in Hong Kong, adding that he did not pay much attention to Rogers’ “conjecture.”
But Lai said he thought Rogers could “play a role” for Hong Kong by speaking up about the city internationally, as Hong Kong residents may run afoul of the security law, which came into force in June 2020, if they did so.
“Because now with the [national security law], we cannot contact [foreign] politicians and leaders, otherwise it will be suspicious of [committing] collusion,” he said. The legislation criminalises subversion, secession, terrorism and foreign collusion.
“[Rogers] is outside, he can do a lot of things that we cannot do here, you know, talking to politicians and government officials… to support Hong Kong,” Lai said, adding that he did not consider that to be an offence.
Benedict Rogers. Photo: Facebook/Hong Kong Cultural & Political Forum.
Lai has pleaded not guilty to two counts of conspiring to collude with foreign forces under the security law and a third charge of conspiring to publish “seditious” materials under a colonial-era legislation. He faces life behind bars if convicted.
Prosecutors have alleged that Rogers was one of many “agents” or “intermediaries” of the tycoon to request foreign sanctions against Beijing and Hong Kong.
The prosecution has also said the Live Chat with Jimmy Lai programme, which featured foreign politicians and academics as guests, was evidence of Lai’s collusion.
US-Taiwan ties
The court heard on Wednesday that Lai said Taiwan’s safety depended on the US in the face of the “belligerence of the [Chinese Communist Party]” in an episode broadcast on September 3, 2020. Lai appeared alongside Raymond Burghardt, the ex-director of the American Institute in Taiwan.
Lai also said in the interview that Taiwan’s chip manufacturing industry had become a “strategic weapon” of the US and “leverage” against China.
The tycoon maintained that he was analysing international affairs and denied suggestions that he was advocating for the US to use Taiwan against China.
Lai said he held residency in Taiwan and did not want a war between the two sides of the Taiwan strait.
Lai also told the court it was out of his “own ignorance” that he claimed on Twitter, now known as X, that Hong Kong had become a “police state” before the national security law was enacted.
The court heard Lai made the claim in several tweets shortly before and after the law came into force, including when former opposition lawmaker Lam Cheuk-ting was arrested for rioting and when ex-justice chief Teresa Cheng said police could make arrests based on “reasonable suspicion.”
Lai admitted he had been mistaken after the judges presiding over his trial said arrests on the basis of reasonable suspicion had long been a practice in the common law tradition.
But Lai maintained that Lam’s arrest was an evidence of police abusing their power, as the ex-lawmaker was “defending the people, not offenders.” Lam was last week found guilty of rioting.
Headquarters of Next Digital. File photo: Kyle Lam/HKFP.
Separately, judge Esther Toh asked Lai to explain his understanding of freedom of speech and whether the offence of libel could be considered a restriction of that liberty.
Lai said freedom of speech should protect “wrong” statements and denied he was promoting “extreme” or “absolute” freedom.
The tycoon was also asked to explain a third episode of Live Chat with Jimmy Lai, broadcast on September 17, 2020, in which he said the world should “resist” the Chinese Communist Party and “coerce” it to change.
Lai told the court that by coercion he meant the West should “join together” to be “a great force” to convince China to comply with international rules.
The defence is expected to continue examining the Live Chat with Jimmy Lai programme as trial resumes on Thursday.
Lai has been detained since December 2020. Three judges – handpicked by Hong Kong’s chief executive to hear national security cases – are presiding over his trial in the place of a jury, marking a departure from the city’s common law traditions.
