[Indiscriminate detention of Li Zhiying]The bail appeal will be heard today. The court selects a day to pronounce Li Zhiying on remand| Apple News Network| Apple Daily

The founder of Next Media, Li Zhiying, was accused of colluding with foreign powers and fraud. Earlier, the Court of Final Appeal temporarily revoked his bail, pending the handling of legal appeals raised by the Department of Justice to clarify the bail provisions of the National Security Law. The case opened at 10 o’clock today (2/1) and was heard by five judges designated by the National Security Law. Li Zhiying was transported to the court by the highest-ranking prison vehicle “Iron Armored Dragon” and entered the court through an inflatable tunnel erected by correctional officers. Two hours before the hearing, about 50 media and hundreds of citizens lined up outside the court to enter the hearing. In the morning, the Attorney General had completed its submission, and the hearing continued in the afternoon. After hearing the statement, the final court will choose a day to pronounce sentence, and Li Zhiying continues to be remanded.

The case is heard by five judges designated by the National Security Act. Huang Jiming, a senior case representing Li Zhiying, stated that the judge of the High Court who granted bail did not equate Article 42 of the Minato National Security Act with general bail laws and has considered it Article 42(2) of the National Security Law. Huang also pointed out that if it is to prove that the defendant will continue to endanger national security, the responsibility lies with the prosecution. After hearing the speeches this afternoon, the five judges of the final court announced that they would choose a day for the judgment and that Li Zhiying must continue to be remanded.

[Apple Live]Live link of Li Zhiying’s bail trial

Taiwan “Fruit Burning Terrace”

Earlier court screen


“Apple News” Facebook

“Apple News” YouTube channel


Li Zhiying was escorted to the court by a prison car this morning. 10 minutes before the court session, he was accompanied by eight correctional officers into the prisoner’s bar. As soon as he appeared in court, he greeted his family, Liang Jiajie and others who attended the courtroom, and made heart-warming gestures with both hands. Li Zhiying and later looked around, looking for her daughter. Li Zhiying’s daughter immediately ran to the prison bar and waved hello to her father through the glass.

A large number of police officers were on guard in the final hospital area in the morning and divided the interview area and the demonstration area by setting up their opponents. A number of pro-Chinese groups demonstrated outside the court. Some people pulled up protest banner posters that read “Fatty Li deals with poisoning citizens,” and “Supports the National Security Law and severely punishes traitors.” They demanded a “heavy sentence” for Li Zhiying.

The Catholic Bishop Emeritus Chen Rijun of the Hong Kong Diocese, the democrats Liang Jiajie, He Junren, Li Yongda, Hong Kong’s “Apple Daily” vice president Chen Peimin, and Apple News platform director Zhang Zhiwei attended the courtroom.

The case is heard by five judges designated by the National Security Law, including Chief Judge Zhang Juneng, permanent judges Li Yi and Huo Zhaogang, and non-permanent judges Chen Zhaokai and Situ Jing. No overseas judges participated in this case, and it is also the first case handled by Chief Judge Zhang Juneng since taking office.

Senior Counsel Deng Leqin, who originally represented Li Zhiying, did not participate in this hearing. Li Zhiying appointed two other senior lawyers to fight, namely Huang Jiming, who specializes in public law and civil cases, and Huang Peiqi, who specializes in criminal cases. The Department of Justice will continue to be represented by Zhou Tianxing, the Senior Assistant Criminal Prosecutor in charge of National Security Law cases.

In December last year, Judge Li Yunteng of the National Security of the High Court approved Li Zhiying, who had been detained for 20 days, to bail under strict conditions, including not being allowed to leave the residence, not posting any messages or interviews on the Internet or in the media, etc., which he considered complied with Article 42 of the National Security Law. It provides that there are good reasons to believe that the defendant will not continue to commit acts that endanger national security. The Department of Justice requested the Final Court to clarify the meaning of Article 42 of the National Security Law and was granted permission to appeal.

Zhou Tianxing’s statement on behalf of the Department of Justice pointed out that the focus of this hearing is on how to correctly interpret and apply Article 42(2) of the National Security Law, emphasizing that when interpreting the law, the court must consider the main purpose of the National Security Law and the affiliation of the SAR government. The constitutional responsibility of the lower organs (including courts) is to effectively protect national security, including preventing, stopping and punishing those who violate the National Security Law.

Zhou pointed out that the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress made a decision on the Hong Kong National Security Law on May 28 last year. The Hong Kong court does not have the jurisdiction to hear whether the National Security Law is unconstitutional, invalid or violates the Basic Law. Moreover, the defense did not question 42(2) The constitutionality of the article. Zhou pointed out that both the Basic Law and the National Security Law are national laws, which restrict different rights and obligations after targeting, and are not challenged by the constitution.

The Attorney General’s submission stated that the prosecution does not need to prove the possibility of the defendant repeating the offence, because there is no guarantee that a defendant will or will not do certain acts in the future, and the bail conditions should not be considered. However, the Attorney General’s statement attracted many judges to question.

The Attorney General’s submission again pointed out that “acts that endanger national security” are not only limited to crimes under the National Security Law, but also include non-committal acts. It also uses Article 23 of the Basic Law, which has not yet been enacted locally, as an example, which refers to establishing ties with foreign political organizations. Also included.

Senior Assistant Prosecutor Zhou Tianxing, representing the Department of Justice, gave a statement to define “acts that endanger national security”, stating that “acts” are not limited to crimes under the national security law, but also include local crimes and any acts that endanger national security , And take Article 23 of the Basic Law, which has not yet been locally enacted, as an example, which refers to the provisions stipulating that foreign political organizations or groups conduct political activities in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, or that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region political organizations or groups establish with foreign political organizations or groups Contact etc.

Zhou Tianxing also pointed out that the National Security Law does not replace the presumption of innocence, and it also complies with the human rights law. In the following week, he made a statement on the right to freedom. He pointed out that the respondent relied on multiple European Court of Human Rights cases, but none of them involved national security; and the content of the cases should not be applied to cases of different merits, nor can the relevant principles of the European Convention on Human Rights. Apply directly to Hong Kong. (Hong Kong “Apple Daily” / report)


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.