Media mogul Jimmy Lai Chee-ying’s defense counsel argued in a Hong Kong court on Monday that a conspiracy charge laid on his client had exceeded the prosecution time limit, with the court having no jurisdiction over the case.
Lai, wearing a light grey suit jacket, was escorted into the courtroom this morning; seeming relaxed, he smiled and waved to family members and friends before putting headphones on.
Senior counsel Robert Pang Yiu-hung from Lai’s legal team later told the court that Lai is slightly hard of hearing, but there is no need for interpretation.
Upon the trial began, one of the three national security judges presiding over the case, Esther Toh Lye-ping, made a rebuttal on a recent local media report that the court had rejected Lai’s application to allow overseas witnesses to testify via live stream.
She cited Witnesses Outside Hong Kong Rule that such an application should be made within 42 days before a Court of First Instance trial and said the court had not received any applications from Lai’s side.
Pang also confirmed that his team had not made any of the applications.
The first day of the trial focused on legal arguments raised by the defense side.
Pang cited section 159D of the Crime Ordinance that proceedings of conspiracy charge “may not be instituted for that offense because any time limit applicable to the institution of any such proceedings has expired.”
He also cited section 11 of the ordinance, saying the time limit for the crimes should be six months from the date the crime was first committed.
He suggested two “important dates”: April 19, 2019, the publication date of the first alleged seditious article; and June 24, 2021, when the last piece of alleged seditious article was published.
He said by counting a six-month time limit, the prosecution should have brought Lai to court on October 1, 2019, or December 24, 2021 – but the prosecution filed legal proceedings on December 28, 2021, which had exceeded the time limit by four days.
Pang also raised doubts about the definitions of “begun” and “institute” in the ordinance.
National security judge Alex Lee Wan-tang raised concern after hearing the defense’s claim. He asked the defense whether, if the defendant conspired to commit a series of offenses and each offense was prosecuted separately, there would be a possibility of the first charge becoming invalid while the other charges remain valid.
The defense agreed, adding each new conspiracy charge would need to be brought to court and prosecuted as a new case.
The defense said additional materials over the dispute will be submitted to the court, as the judges adjourned the case to tomorrow upon the defense’s request for more time to prepare for the trial.
Hong Kong United Times丨香港聯合時報丨HKUT 