HONG KONG – Hong Kong’s highest court ordered Jimmy Lai, the mogul of the pro-democracy publication, to return to prison on Thursday, just days after being released on bail, the latest twist in the ongoing, staggering legal battle. by one of the most prominent anti-government figures.
The fate of Lai, the most prominent person charged under Hong Kong’s new national security law, was seen by some as a barometer of the city’s judicial independence. After being accused of conspiring with “foreign forces”, including for asking for sanctions against Hong Kong, Lai was denied bail earlier this month.
But he was released on appeal last week, albeit under exceptionally strict conditions, including house arrest and a ban on using social media or speaking to reporters. The Hong Kong government immediately appealed this decision to the Court of Final Appeal, the highest court in the city.
The official Chinese Communist Party media attacked the judge’s decision to grant bail, calling Mr. Lai – the founder of the burning Apple Daily tabloid – “notorious and extremely dangerous”. State media even raised the possibility that a court in Mainland China could take over the case, as allowed by national security law.
The Chinese government imposed the security law in June to contain furious protests against the government in Hong Kong, a former British colony that promised 50 years of civil freedom and relative autonomy when it was returned to China in 1997. The new law allows for penalties of life in prison for the vaguely defined crimes of subversion, secession and collusion, and grants the authorities broad enforcement powers.
The hearing at the Final Court of Appeal was closely monitored, in part because it was the first time that a case under the security law was brought before the Hong Kong high court.
It was also seen as a test for an issue at the heart of the new law: whether it essentially prohibits bail for national security defendants, as Lai’s critics have argued. Some lawyers fear that such a provision could violate defendants’ rights. The law states that “no bail will be granted” unless the defendants no longer prove a threat to national security.
But the decision of the Court of Final Appeal on Thursday was closely adapted, offering little resolution on those issues. The panel of three judges did not decide how high the level of requirement for the granting of bail should be.
Instead, the judges agreed only to consider this issue at a hearing in February and to keep Mr. Lai in custody until then. The panel said the government had raised “issues of great and general importance” about the security law’s implications for bail.
The panel’s three judges were among those chosen by Hong Kong chief executive Carrie Lam to hear national security cases, as required by the security law. As executive directors are handpicked by Beijing through a committee, Ms. Lam’s selection of judges has raised concerns about her impartiality.
But one of the panel’s judges, Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma, was outspoken in defending the independence of the judiciary.
The first instance judge who granted bail to Mr. Lai, Judge Alex Lee, was also chosen by Ms. Lam. Judge Lee wrote in his decision that he believed that strict bail conditions would prevent Mr. Lai from repeating his alleged crimes.
Judge Lee also said that Lai’s public statements, which prosecutors said proved that he had been in contact with foreign powers, appeared to be “comments and criticisms” rather than requests for real interference in Hong Kong affairs.
Lai is due to be tried in April.