Jimmy Lai, the founder of Next Media, and his three companies were charged with colluding with foreign forces in violation of the Hong Kong National Security Law. Lai earlier applied for the termination of the hearing, alleging that the government's obstruction of his appointment of Queen's Counsel Timothy Wynn Owen (Tim Owen) was considered to be "persecution" rather than prosecution, and that he would not be denied a fair trial. Three designated judges of the National Security Law of the High Court unanimously rejected Lai's application on the 3th.


The four defendants, Jimmy Lai (4), Apple Daily Limited, Apple Daily Printing Co., Ltd. and Apple Daily Internet Co., Ltd., are charged with multiple counts of conspiracy to publish seditious publications and conspiracy to collude with foreign forces, and the trial is scheduled to commence on 75 September and a case management hearing will be held tomorrow (9 December).

Jimmy Lai's case for violating the National Security Law was originally scheduled to begin on December 2022, 12, but due to interpretation issues, the trial will not begin until September this year after being adjourned.

Lai challenged the opaque appointment process for appointing the appointed judges

In his application, Lai's lawyer argued that the process of appointing judges under the NSL was biased because the appointed judges were only appointed for a one-year term of office, and the criteria for appointing the Chief Executive were not known to outsiders, nor did outsiders know how designated judges would be renewed. The opaque appointment process and insecure tenure may give outsiders the impression that the appointed judges will avoid becoming disobedient judges.

It is believed that the government maliciously obstructed the hiring of the British Imperial Palace

In addition, Lai also believed that the government maliciously obstructed Lai's hiring of British Queen's Counsel Tim Owen, bluntly saying that this was "persecution" rather than prosecution, and pointed out that when the National Security Commission assessed the national security risks involved in Lai's appointment of Tim Owen on January 1 this year, it recommended that the immigration department should refuse Tim Owen's application for a visa. However, Lai's legal team wrote to the Department of Justice on the 11th of the same month asking for clarification on whether the NPC's interpretation of the law would not affect the court's earlier decision, and the Department of Justice replied to Lai's letter at that time without mentioning the NSC's decision. Lai later entered into office on the NSC matter, and only in March this year did he obtain the NSC's decision in the affidavit, and Lai believed that it was the duty of the Department of Justice to voluntarily inform the NSC of its decision.

Jimmy Lai wants Tim Owen to guide the interpretation and review process. (See the figure below)

+9

The Department of Justice found that no injustice had been caused

In response, the representative of the Department of Justice said that judges were required to abide by the judicial oath and that it was difficult to say that they would be influenced by the Government, and stressed that although the Chief Executive appointed designated judges, the cases that judges had to hear remained within the competence of the judiciary and did not cause injustice.

The High Court ruled that the work of the NSC was not subject to court interference

In addition, Jimmy Lai earlier advised the Immigration Department to deny a visa to the NSC's assessment of the national security risks involved in Lai's hiring of Tim Owen, arguing that he had overstepped his authority and filed a case for judicial review, while Chief Justice Poon Siu-chu of the High People's Court issued a judgment in mid-month, holding that the work of the NSC should not be interfered with by any organ, including the courts, and ruled that the NSC's approach did not exceed its authority.

Case number: HCCC51/2022

Jimmy Lai's case|Lai said that the obstruction of hiring Tim Own was persecution and asked to terminate the hearing Next Monday's ruling that the National Security Commission refused to issue a visa to Tim Owen and exceeded its authority Jimmy Lai applied for permission to review the case, and the official ruled against Jimmy Lai|Lai applied for termination of the hearing The accusing party obstructed his appointment of Tim Owen for persecution of Jimmy Lai, and the appointment of Tim Owen filed for judicial review Pointing out that the National Security Commission exceeded its authority and recommended that the Immigration Department refuse to issue a visa|Government Proposed Legislation Overseas barristers participating in national security cases must first obtain a certificate from the Chief Executive and Jimmy Lai's appointment of Tim Owen Lai's interpretation of the law does not affect the ruling of the Court of Final Court Ask the Department of Justice to issue a statement Jimmy Lai's case - the Department of Justice begins to amend the legislation Lin Dingguo said that he must be the first weapon: a tool for the protection of national security by law