Written by 
Detained media mogul Jimmy Lai wanted to “explain” the thinking behind protesters’ storming of the legislature in 2019 through his newspaper Apple Daily to ensure the movement’s survival, the tycoon’s national security trial has heard.
Lai, whose defence questioning expected to take 15 days, took the stand for the second day on Thursday. Under defence lawyer Steven Kwan’s questioning, Lai also denied that he aimed to incite “hatred” against the Beijing and Hong Kong governments in his personal column.
The 76-year-old founder of the shuttered Apple Daily newspaper stands accused of two counts of taking part in a “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces” under a Beijing-imposed security law, and one count of conspiring to publish “seditious” materials under a separate, colonial-era law. He faces up to life in prison if convicted.
During his questioning, Kwan referred to text messages between Lai and former senior staff at the paper who testified against him earlier this year.
Kwan presented to the court a handwritten letter Lai had addressed to former editor-in-chief Ryan Law in which the founder wrote: “Freedom of speech is now a dangerous endeavour. Colleagues are advised to be extra careful and not to take any risks, as their own safety is important.”
The letter was published in Apple Daily on April 13, 2021, 10 days after he sent it to Law.
Lai denied that he had told ex-publisher Cheung Kim-hung to “keep going” and continue running the newspaper until it was shut down, saying that was inconsistent with his warnings to be cautious. “That would be very contradictory to what I said then.”
This January, Cheung quoted Lai as saying to him once: “Why should we shut ourselves down? We should keep going until we are shut down while staying cautious in these times.”
Lai was also asked about former associate publisher Chan Pui-man’s earlier testimony, during which she said that Lai had asked her to compile a “shitlist” of possible sanctions targets after then-US president announced an executive order revoking Hong Kong’s special trade status with the US.
Lai denied writing the message to Chan, saying it was forwarded from someone with ties to the Trump administration.
‘Explaining’ violence
Lai on Thursday said his remarks about Apple Daily’s coverage of the storming of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council on July 1, 2019 did not amount to “editorial directions.”
Lai was shown WhatsApp messaging records with Chan, in which he “suggested” focusing Apple Daily’s report on how the young protesters were thinking.
“I was concerned about the incident which would damage the movement,” he said, referring to the storming of the legislature. But he denied that he was giving Chan a direction, saying he was merely just “discussing” the matter.
The storming of the legislature was considered a watershed moment in the 2019 protests and unrest, which erupted over a now-axed bill that would have allowed criminal suspects to be extradited to mainland China.
Kwan went on to ask Lai how his stance on sympathising with protesters squared with his opposition to violence, as he stated on Wednesday. “Well, I would not say it was serious violence, nobody was hurt or in danger but it was violence because it damaged some properties and overrode the law — illegally,” Lai said.
“Were you opposed to that?” Kwan asked, to which Lai answered in the affirmative.
“So your focus was to suggest that [Apple Daily] transmit the thoughts of the young people,” Judge Esther Toh said, before Lai interrupted: “Not to transmit, but to explain, because I thought it was a wrong thing for them to do.”
Explaining why the protesters resorted to violent means could gain them sympathy from Hongkongers, Lai said. The ultimate aim was that the storming of the legislature — a “negative incident,” as Lai called it — would not damage the movement.
“I was always concerned about the radicalism — that’s why I approached Wayland [Chan Tsz-wah],” Lai said. Chan was a paralegal who stands accused alongside Lai and has testified against him.
Kwan told the court that he intended to show that Lai regularly gave suggestions to the editorial board even before the protests and the period of the tycoon’s alleged offences, presenting about a dozen text exchanges with the former associate publisher dating back to May 2018.
“Sometimes you suggest something to enrich the reporting. I’m just pointing out some perspectives that she could consider,” Lai said of one instance, saying his remarks did not amount to editorial directions.
‘Hatred’
Lai on Thursday denied that he was trying to incite “hatred” of Beijing or the Hong Kong government, as the prosecution has alleged, saying that he had only tried to convince people to attend legal demonstrations.
The first article shown to the court was titled “Please come forward and protect the last line of defence,” published in April 2019.
When asked whether he intended to incite hatred of the central government, Lai said: “no.”
“The essential bearing of this article is projection, explaining what would happen [if the extradition bill was passed]. There was never… instigation for people to hate or to do anything except for demonstrating,” he continued.
He made similar remarks regarding another article published the next month, again denying that he had intended to make people hate the central authorities.
A third article, titled “Stop Hong Kong from sinking for ourselves and our next generation,” was presented to the court.
Addressing the prosecution’s allegation that the mogul attempted to excite Hong Kong residents to engage in “unlawful” conduct, Lai said he had never asked Hongkongers to do anything unlawful, only to participate in a legal demonstration to maintain the city’s status quo.
“On the [contrary]. I asked them to demonstrate to keep the existing Hong Kong structure,” he said. “I asked them to come out to demonstrate, and the demonstration was legal.”
Judge Esther Toh drew Lai’s attention to the end of the article, putting it to Lai that his intention was to paint a picture of Hong Kong that would see a repeat of the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown. He replied: “I was just trying to convince them of what might happen if they did not come out.”
When Lai’s trial began on December 18, 2023, he had already spent more than 1,000 days in custody after having had his bail revoked in December 2020. Three judges – handpicked by Hong Kong’s chief executive to hear national security cases – are presiding over Lai’s trial in the place of a jury, marking a departure from the city’s common law traditions.
Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong’s mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
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
