Hong Kong Court Rejects Lai’s Bid to Dismiss Sedition Charge
Facts
- On Friday, a Hong Kong court rejected a bid by pro-democracy publisher Jimmy Lai to throw out a sedition charge against him in his landmark national security trial.1
- Lai, 76, was arrested amid the city's purge of dissidents in the wake of massive pro-democracy demonstrations in 2019. If found guilty, he may be sentenced to life in jail under a broad national security provision that Beijing enforced; he's accused of plotting to publish seditious publications and conspiring with foreign powers to jeopardize national security.2
- Robert Pang, Lai's attorney, had argued that the prosecution should drop the sedition allegation since it was not brought within six months of the alleged crime.3
- The judges dismissed the tycoon's defense argument, stating that the bench found the prosecution had not broken any criminal procedure when they submitted the sedition charge against Lai. He will now undergo an approximately 80-day trial without a jury.4
- The trial has been adjourned until Jan. 2, when the prosecution is expected to give its opening arguments against Lai in the sedition trial. 5
Sources: 1Al Jazeera, 2Associated Press, 3Reuters, 4Independent and 5Barrons.
Narratives
- Anti-China narrative, as provided by Wall Street Journal. All that Jimmy Lai has done is demand peaceful democratic elections in Hong Kong, to which the PRC has responded by saying 'forget it.' What Beijing seems to have missed is the underlying test of natural justice and human rights that this case is about now. For Hong Kong to remain a credible global financial and business hub, China must honor its agreements and uphold democratic principles.
- Pro-China narrative, as provided by Globaltimes. More than a quarter century after Hong Kong returned to PRC control, the UK hasn't gotten over its colonial hangover. London is meddling in due process and Jimmy Lai will face charges for documented seditious acts. If anything, the machinations by foreign powers to help Lai in the case only reinforce the charge of sedition against the media tycoon.