Jimmy Lai, the founder of Next Digital, along with three related companies of Apple Daily, has been convicted on two counts of "conspiracy to collude with foreign or external forces to endanger national security" and one count of "conspiracy to publish seditious publications." He is now awaiting sentencing.
Hong Kong political and legal figures interviewed by Wen Wei Po yesterday (Jan. 17) stated that, as a long-time operator of a media organization, Lai had no reason to be unaware of the Hong Kong National Security Law. Moreover, after the law came into effect, he not only failed to restrain himself but also escalated his actions. Considering the facts of the case, Lai played a leading role, committed serious crimes, showed no remorse, and even violated the law while in custody.
Ma Fung-kwok, a Hong Kong deputy to the National People's Congress, criticized Lai's long-term actions for inciting the public to oppose and resist the SAR government, creating numerous social incidents.
"Before the enactment of the National Security Law, his behavior had already been controversial."
Ma said the provisions of the National Security Law are clear, and the penalties are explicit. As a seasoned media professional, Lai had no reason to be unaware of the relevant regulations. However, after the law came into effect, he not only failed to restrain himself but also escalated his actions. After 156 days of detailed trial, Lai's criminal facts and remarks have been fully revealed to the public. The court ultimately found him guilty on three charges, and the entire judgment was based on clear and factual grounds, fully adhering to the rule of law.
"He showed no remorse"
Ma pointed out that the crimes Lai is involved in are serious charges under the National Security Law. Since he has been found guilty, he should, in principle, receive a severe sentence. As for mitigation, the premise of mitigation lies in the defendant's remorse and repentance for their actions. However, throughout the trial, no signs of remorse were observed in Lai. Instead, he persisted in his original stance, showing no intention of admitting guilt or repenting. Such mitigation pleas are difficult to accept, and therefore, the court should impose a heavy sentence.
Regarding the defense's mitigation arguments, such as health conditions and age, Ma believes they are not strongly persuasive. During the trial, Lai's physical and mental condition appeared normal. Ultimately, whether to accept such mitigation pleas remains a decision for the court and the judge.
He emphasized that the nature of the crimes Lai is involved in is grave.
"His (Lai) actions attempted to urge foreign governments and political forces to impose so-called 'sanctions' on the central government and the SAR government, and even hinted at overthrowing the existing governance order. The harm caused to national security and Hong Kong's social stability is immeasurable."
He noted that imposing severe penalties for such serious crimes is a reasonable measure. If the court ultimately imposes a heavy sentence, it will set a significant precedent, aligning with the spirit of the law and social justice. It will also serve as a strong warning to potential lawbreakers who seek to destabilize Hong Kong, safeguarding the steady implementation of "one country, two systems" and the long-term stability and prosperity of the city.
Legislative Council member Elaine Chik expressed anticipation and support for the court's sentencing decision in accordance with the law, believing that the sentence will clearly demonstrate to society the serious consequences of violating the National Security Law.
"In fact, national security laws are not unique to Hong Kong. Like other places, Hong Kong has the responsibility and obligation to safeguard national security. In foreign countries, violating national security laws can result in the death penalty, which is more severe than in Hong Kong."
She emphasized that as a media worker, Lai used his influence to continuously sway young people and disseminate severely negative information about the government. These are all well-documented crimes that cannot be denied. During the trial, he and his family spared no effort in continuously discrediting the proceedings through foreign forces and exerting pressure on judicial personnel, demonstrating his unrepentant nature. She believes the court will consider these factors and issue a deterrent sentence.
Committing further crimes while in custody
Barrister Eunice Yung said that according to the court and prosecution's statements, Lai, as the mastermind, continuously planned and promoted actions endangering national security. Not only was the case serious, but he also continued to issue instructions, maintain contact with accomplices, and operate the involved organization while on bail and in custody, showing utter disregard for the law and judicial authority. Committing crimes while in custody is, according to judicial practice, a clear aggravating factor, reflecting his lack of remorse and high risk of reoffending, posing a serious and ongoing threat to society and national security.
She believes that, considering the facts of the case, Lai played a leading role, committed serious crimes, showed no remorse, and violated the law while in custody, all of which are aggravating factors. According to the National Security Law and criminal sentencing principles, the court should impose severe punishment in accordance with the law to uphold the rule of law.
(Source: Wen Wei Po)
Related News:
Deepline | Mitigation based on facts, sentencing must reflect justice
Comment