the pro-democracy primary, 16 defendants who pleaded not guilty; Trial before the Kowloon West Court (Provisional High Court) today (29 December). The prosecution and defense have a legal dispute over the principle of conspirators. Although the prosecution's National Security Law does not provide a retroactive period, the words and deeds of the defendants before the date of the charges can also be used to accuse them of conspiring to subvert state power, and for the first time, it is proposed that the words and deeds of the defendants before the charges can constitute the crime of "misconduct of public officials". However, the judge questioned this statement, not only criticizing the prosecution for putting forward this new argument in the middle of the trial, but also asking the judge: Does this mean that people should be cautious in their lives? The defense argument also accused the party of grossly unfair by temporarily changing its position, reiterating that if the agreement is not illegal before the implementation of the National Security Law, the principle of conspirators cannot be invoked. The defense will continue its case on Wednesday (31st).

Timing of the primary election. (See the figure below)

+11

The prosecution argues that the common purpose of the pan-democratic meal has been created

In his submission, the chief prosecutor, Zhou Tianxing, pointed out that the defendants' conspiracy began at a dinner party in January 2020 between Benny Tai, Au Nuoxuan and others, when they discussed the primary election plan, and that the common purpose of the case at that time – to indiscriminately veto the financial case in order to fight for the five major demands – had already arisen and remained unchanged from beginning to end, and continued after the implementation of the National Security Law in July, so the words and deeds of the defendants before the implementation of the National Security Law could be used to prove their conspiracy to subvert state power. Zhou also pointed out that although the National Security Law does not have a retroactive period, the words and deeds of the defendant before the date of the charge can still be used as evidence if they are related to the charge.

The preface to the accusations in the United States case is equally powerful

Zhou also pointed out that even before the implementation of the National Security Law, this common purpose was illegal and could constitute "public officer misconduct" under common law, and cited the US Court of Appeals case that if the defendant had participated in the conspiracy long before the date of charge, the jury should not only consider the words and deeds of the defendant between the date of charge, and the words and actions of any person in the conspiracy plan before the charge were equally powerful.

The prosecution mentioned the primary election at a dinner in January 2020, and the common purpose involved in the case has arisen. (Profile picture)

The official asked what should be done if it was not illegal when he spoke 50 years later

For example, Chan pointed out that if the three judges in court said that they wanted to overthrow the government, even if it was not illegal at the time of publication, if they committed the act of overthrowing the government after the enactment of several laws 50 years later, the prosecution could continue to use the words and deeds of that year to present evidence. Zhou responded that the words and deeds of the three people could help prove that they continued to commit the conspiracy. Chen Xiaoyan: "So you mean that we must be cautious in our lives?" It immediately caused everyone in the court to laugh.

The prosecution did not raise or constitute another charge halfway through

Judge Li Yunteng also pointed out that the prosecution's allegation that the defendant's conduct was equivalent to the misconduct of a public official was raised for the first time today, which was not fair to the defense, and Li Guan also said that he had asked the prosecution to clarify the "conspirator principle" position on the first day of trial, saying bluntly: "Why did it take us more than 50 days to know that you have this fallback position?"

Emphasis on non-prosecution of pre-NSL conduct

Prosecutor Wan explained that there had been no opportunity to raise the case, stressing that they were not trying to accuse public officials of misconduct, but only using the principle of "conspirators", each defendant agreed to the words and actions of other conspirators before the crime. Li Yunteng questioned that the prosecution's opening statement should have mentioned this point, rather than just restating the evidence. Wan responded that the prosecution did not prosecute the defendant's pre-NSL conduct, so it was not raised in the opening statement to avoid confusion.

None of the cases were opened without mentioning misconduct by public officials

Chan was still not satisfied with the prosecution's statement, and looked at the opening argument, saying: "This is the thickest opening statement I have ever handled, but it says nothing about 'misconduct of public officials'." Wan stressed that it was not intended to raid either side and that the indictment had stated that the defendants had deliberately or deliberately neglected to perform their duties as members of the Legislative Council after conspiracy to be elected, which was sufficient for the defence to understand the prosecution's position.

Only American cases were found to support the argument

Mr Lee further pointed out that the part cited in the prosecution case – i.e. whether the jury needs to consider the remarks of conspirators other than the defendant before the date of charge – was only an "obiter" used by the judge to explain the background of the case, not a key issue, nor a conspirator principle. Wan admitted that he had only found this case to support it, and confessed: "This is what we can find."

The defence argued that nothing more unfair had been encountered

Defense barrister Shen Shiwen said that the prosecution had many opportunities to argue that the conspiracy of the defendants was illegal before the implementation of the National Security Law, but only said that it was a sudden change of position near the end of the prosecution plan, which was "extremely unfair" to the defense, saying: "I have not encountered a situation more unfair than this."

The principle of not violating the law and conspiracy before the National Security Law is reiterated also does not apply

Shen continued to point out that the premise of the application of the conspirator principle is that the agreements before the defendants were already illegal, and their words and deeds continued to promote the unfinished illegal agreements. If the agreement is not illegal before the implementation of the National Security Law, the principle of complicity cannot be applied.

16 defendants who pleaded not guilty. (See the figure below)

+11

The 16 defendants: Ng Cheng Hang (44), Cheng Tat Hung (34), Yang Xueying (36), Peng Zhuoqi (28), Ho Qiming (34), Lau Wai Chung (55), Wong Biyun (63), Sze Delai (40), Ho Kwai Lan (32), Chan Chi Chuan (50), Chow Ka Shing (25), Lam Cheuk-ting (45), Leung Kwok-hung (66), Ke Yiu-lin (51), Lee Yuk Xin (29) and Yu Wai Ming (35). The charges allege that between 2020 July 7 and 1 January 2021, the defendants conspired with others to subvert state power.

31 defendants who pleaded guilty. (See the figure below)

+26

The 31 guilty defendants: Tai Yiu-ting, Au Nuo Xuan, Chiu Ka-yin, Chung Kam-lin, Yuen Ka-wai, Leung Hoang Wai, Tsui Zijian, Shum Zijie, Mao Mengjing, Fung Tat Chun, Liu Zefeng, Joshua Wong, Tam Man Ho, Li Ka Tat, Tam Teck Chi, Wu Zhiwei, Chu Kai-di, Zhang Kesen, Wong Ziyue, Yin Siu-kin, Kwok Ka-ki, Wu Min'er, Tam Kaibang, Liu Chin-kuang, Yang Yueqiao, Fan Guowei, Lui Chi-hang, Shum Aohui, Wang Baiyu, Lin Jingnan and Wu Jianwei.

Of the 13 defendants on quasi-bail, 10 pleaded not guilty. (See the figure below)

+11

Case number: HCCC 69/2022

Primary election case (16)|The prosecution's opening statement tells the role of the 3 defendants Mention the primary election and the speculation of the primary election case (<>)|Au Nuoxuan testifies for the prosecution From the pan-democratic dinner to the primary election forum primary election case (<>)|After the coordination meeting, the districts are now divided Zhang Kesen and others mentioned the preliminary election case of the statement of no regret Zhang Kesen and others mentioned the preliminary election case of no regret (<>)|The defense revealed the private message Zheng Dahong before the trial of Nuoxuan Synopsis: Study the Advance and Retreat Primary Election Case (<>)|See many candidates make political statements one after another Au Nuoxuan said that he felt helpless in the primary election case (<>)|Zhao Jiaxian gave evidence Refers to the local protest faction's stepping on the boundary to make the incident out of control primary election case (<>)|Zhao Jiaxian accepted the defense's interrogation Prosecution Lie, Guo Rongheng and other <> are co-conspirators in the primary election case (<>)|Pre-establishment Proposal Confession Recording New West Coordination Meeting Lin Jingnan was summoned to testify