Hong Kong’s 47 in national security law case: defence barrister complains of trial’s ‘notoriety’, difficulty in securing expert witnesses
- Barrister Trevor Beel for journalist turned activist Gwyneth Ho takes aim at prosecution for what he says was late submission of expert statements
- Judges dismiss his argument as ‘speculations’; Beel also calls on prosecution to clarify allegations
A lawyer for one of the Hong Kong opposition figures in the city’s biggest national security trial has told the court he expected difficulties in securing expert witnesses to counter those of prosecutors due to “notoriety” surrounding the legal proceedings.
Barrister Trevor Beel on Friday complained about prosecutors’ lateness in submitting legal statements from social media experts they wished to rely on later in their case.
He argued the delay had “irredeemably prejudiced” the case of his client, journalist turned activist Gwyneth Ho Kwai-lam, one of the 16 opposition activists and politicians currently on trial for subversion at West Kowloon Court after pleading not guilty.
The prosecutors wish to call on two specialised police sergeants to testify in the estimated 90-day trial to discuss the operations of Facebook and YouTube, two key online platforms featured in the trial. But Beel complained he was only provided with the English translation of their statements days before the trial began earlier this week.
The barrister pointed to potential problems he foresaw in preparing a rebuttal.
‘Lethal weapon’: prosecutors take aim at 47 in Hong Kong national security trial
He argued due to the nature of the trial, there was “reasonable expectation” his team would encounter difficulties in securing willing scholars to counter the prosecution.
“It has a certain notoriety to it,” Beel told judges Alex Lee Wan-tang, Andrew Chan Hing-wai and Johnny Chan Jong-herng, who are among a pool of jurists hand-picked by the government to hear national security cases.
But the judges dismissed his request to strike out the two prosecution witnesses, after Chan called the concerns “speculations”.
02:22
Subversion trial gets under way for 47 Hong Kong opposition activists and former legislators
Ho was among a wider group of 47 opposition figures charged under the national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020. The rest, including student activist Joshua Wong Chi-fung, have either pleaded guilty or expressed willingness to plead guilty, with four expected to aid the prosecution as witnesses.
Prosecutors argued an unofficial primary held by the opposition camp in July 2020 to narrow the field down to candidates with the best chances for the legislative elections that year – which were later postponed – was part of a wider plot to paralyse and subvert the government.
Hong Kong opposition activists to face trial without jury in subversion case
At the Friday court session, Jonathan Man Tak-ho, deputy director of public prosecutions, said his team had provided the first set of statements from the experts in Chinese as early as January 16, despite Beel’s complaint that the English version only came on January 31.
He argued Beel could have relied on his junior bilingual barristers to help him understand the statements, adding that the experts would not be called to court for questioning until weeks later in the trial.
Judge Lee stressed that while the court accepted the submission of the statements, it had not recognised the two sergeants’ qualifications as expert witnesses or the content of their evidence, subject to further challenge by defence lawyers.
Hong Kong justice chief vows to act on concerns over trial delay for activists
On Friday, Beel also asked prosecutors to clarify their allegations.
He said prosecutors appeared to suggest initially they would prove the defendants had “overtly” committed four acts: to follow the result of the primary to send candidates; agree to fail to discharge their future duties as legislators; cause others to follow the same approach; and obtain a majority in the legislature to indiscriminately veto bills to compel the resignation of the then chief executive.
Beel added prosecutors had seemingly changed their views since and intended to argue that defendants were liable as long as they had agreed to carry out such acts without actually taking action.
He urged the prosecutors to then clarify, if that was the case, whether the defendants were to be found guilty based on a partial agreement to some of the acts, or full consent to all of them.
The judges adjourned the case to Monday, when the first prosecution witness, former opposition lawmaker Au Lok-hin, who helped organise the primary, is expected to be called to the stand.
