Judges in Hong Kong’s first national security law trial rule that ‘great harm to society’ must be proven to secure terrorism conviction

Judges in the first trial under Hong Kong’s national security law have dismissed prosecutors’ request for a wide interpretation of the offence of terrorism, ruling that “great harm to society” must be proven to secure conviction rather than simply showing serious injuries were suffered.

Offering a glimpse into the courts’ reading of the Beijing-imposed legislation, the three justices also ruled on Thursday that violence was not an essential element of the secession offence, saying a defendant could still be convicted in the absence of any physical force.

The pretrial hearing at the High Court went ahead after both sides failed to agree on the elements of offences – what the prosecution must prove to establish guilt – facing defendant Tong Ying-kit.

The 24-year-old has been charged with terrorism for allegedly riding a motorcycle into three police officers during a July 1 rally last year.

He faces another count of incitement to commit secession for waving a flag emblazoned with the popular protest slogan: “Liberate Hong Kong; revolution of our times”.

The 15-day trial, slated to start on June 23, was expected to centre on whether Tong had the requisite intent to commit the alleged offences, the proper understanding of the slogan, as well as the gravity of the injuries said to have been sustained by the three officers involved.

Article 20 of the security law introduced last June provides that a person who commits secession or undermines national unification “whether or not by force or threat of force” shall be guilty of an offence.

Article 24 defines terrorist activities as those “causing or intended to cause great harm to society” with a view to coerce the central government or local authorities, or intimidate the public, in order to pursue a political agenda.