customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

sponsorType

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

factSheets

series

knowledgeQuestion

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

copyrighted

customTimezone

liveContents

Brian Wong

Jailed Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and six former opposition lawmakers have lost a final appeal against their convictions for taking part in an illegal march during the 2019 anti-government protests.
The Court of Final Appeal on Monday refused to apply two British legal precedents cited by the appellants to overturn the convictions and jail sentences of the seven opposition figures including veteran democrat Martin Lee Chu-ming.
The five presiding judges also dismissed the appellants’ contention that their prosecution constituted an excessive restriction on their freedom of expression and assembly.
The government praised the judgment in a 1,209-word statement released on Monday evening.
A government spokesman stressed that nobody was above the law and that individual rights must be exercised “in conformity with the relevant legislation to ensure the safeguarding of national security, public order, public safety and the protection of the rights and freedom of others”.
Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung and fellow judge Roberto Ribeiro, who penned the main part of the court’s written judgment, found little room for the application of the British rulings due to “significant” constitutional differences in the two jurisdictions.
They noted the British court did not have the power to declare a measure to restrict a fundamental right unconstitutional, and that authorities in the country could still carry out arrests and prosecutions based on provisions which were found to be “incompatible” with human rights laws.
The judges said it was against this backdrop the British Supreme Court held that the legality of a defendant’s prosecution might be open to challenge in a criminal trial.
They warned against adopting that approach in Hong Kong, as the city’s judges were entitled to rule on the constitutionality of statutory laws, and that an “invalid” provision could not form the basis of a prosecution.
Any request for separate justifications as to the arrest and prosecution of individuals based on constitutionally valid laws was therefore “inappropriate” and “uncalled for”, the judges concluded.

Mr Justice Johnson Lam Man-hon, in remarks made separately to the two judges, found no basis to consider a defendant’s prosecution as a form of human rights restriction requiring justification in the judicial process.
He highlighted the “dire circumstances of public disorder” in 2019 in stressing the necessity for “effective measures”, including the enforcement of relevant laws, for preserving social order.
Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, a non-permanent judge from Britain, also found it “rather strange” for the accused to contend they could be reasonably excused for exercising their right to take part in public assemblies.
“If the law criminalising unauthorised processions, and the decision to object to this procession were each proportionate restrictions of the basic right to freedom of assembly, it is hard to see how the defendants could simply rely on that basic right as ‘lawful authority or reasonable excuse’ for taking part in the procession,” he wrote.
The appeal centred on the seven’s roles in a mass demonstration that organisers had described as a “water flow assembly” at Victoria Park in Causeway Bay on August 18, 2019. The seven were all convicted in 2021 of organising and taking part in the banned march.
A District Court judge imposed jail sentences of eight to 18 months on Lai, who founded the now-closed Apple Daily newspaper, and three former opposition lawmakers – Lee Cheuk-yan, “Long Hair” Leung Kwok-hung and Cyd Ho Sau-lan.
Martin Lee and ex-legislators Albert Ho Chun-yan and Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee were given suspended jail sentences.
The Court of Appeal reduced the sentences of Lai, Lee Cheuk-yan, Leung Kwok-hung and Cyd Ho after it quashed the organising charges, but they had completed their sentences by the time the verdict was delivered last year.


Hongkonger pleads guilty to wearing seditious clothing in first conviction under Article 23

Ex-headmaster charged with fraud for cheating Hong Kong primary school out of HK$270,000

Hong Kong court reduces ‘excessive’ jail terms of 4 students who praised attack on police

6 Hong Kong police officers found guilty of framing street sleeper for drug possession

Hong Kong courts

Hong Kong’s Jimmy Lai, 6 ex-lawmakers lose final appeal against 2019 protest convictions

The appeal focused on the role of Jimmy Lai (centre) and six others in a mass demonstration that organisers said was a “water flow assembly” at Victoria Park in Causeway Bay on August 18, 2019. Photo: Sam Tsang

Protesters attending the rally on August 18, 2019. Photo: Edmond So

Jimmy Lai trial: Hong Kong tycoon loses bid for early discharge

Jimmy Lai is standing trial in front of three judges endorsed by Chief Executive John Lee  to oversee national security proceedings. Photo: AP

A prison van carrying Jimmy Lai arrives at court. Prosecutors have accused Lai of using his now-defunct tabloid newspaper to pursue international sanctions against Hong Kong and Beijing. Photo: Xiaomei Chen

3 Hong Kong judges in Jimmy Lai trial suggest it would be ‘premature’ to acquit mogul

Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai has denied two conspiracy charges of collusion with foreign forces and a third count of conspiracy to print and distribute seditious publications. Photo: AP

Police patrol the area around West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday as Jimmy Lai’s national security trial resumed. Photo: Xiaomei Chen

News

Hong Kong

Law and Crime

Top court says two British legal precedents cited by appellants to overturn convictions and jail terms do not apply in Hong Kong


Top court says two British legal precedents cited by appellants to overturn convictions ad jail terms do not apply in Hong Kong.


Jimmy Lai

Hong Kong protests

Crime in Hong Kong