Hong Kong court endorses attempt by Jimmy Lai, 6 others to quash convictions for taking part in banned 2019 march
- Court of Appeal rules seven opposition figures can take their complaints to top court
- Appellants argued police ban on 2019 march was an excessive restriction on their freedom of expression and assembly
The Court of Appeal decided in a judgment handed down on Friday that the seven opposition figures, including veteran democrat Martin Lee Chu-ming, could take their complaints to the top court on a point of law of “great and general importance”.
The appellants argued the police ban on the march on Hong Kong Island on August 18, 2019, was an excessive restriction on their freedom of expression and assembly, and that their involvement could be excused in a criminal trial.
Mr Justice Andrew Macrae, vice-president of the Court of Appeal, stressed it was bound by a 2005 Court of Final Appeal ruling that upheld the constitutionality of a notification scheme requiring protesters to obtain police approval to stage demonstrations.
But the bench found it was arguable that a 2021 landmark ruling by the United Kingdom’s Supreme Court might change how the legality of prosecuting an unauthorised assembly offence was assessed.
The Supreme Court ruled by a majority that if authorities had violated a protester’s basic rights, a statutory defence of lawful excuse could be established.
Hong Kong court grants partial victory to Jimmy Lai, 6 others in protest appeal
Macrae said that judgment was not binding on the local courts but was nonetheless a “persuasive” decision.
Hong Kong court allows appeal against acquittal of Tiananmen vigil group member
But the three presiding judges declined to offer their blessings on a prosecutors’ appeal that sought to restore the seven’s earlier convictions related to a separate charge for organising an unauthorised demonstration, which was previously quashed.
The court also rejected a request by Lai to cover the legal costs of the proceedings after finding he had brought “obvious” suspicions on himself and “led the prosecution to think the case against him was much stronger than it in fact was”.
Both parties are required to seek the top court’s approval for a final appeal regardless of the Court of Appeal’s decision, meaning prosecutors still have a chance to renew their application before the highest judges.
Jimmy Lai trial will show how ‘bad’ his actions were: Hong Kong security chief
Suspended jail sentences were handed to Martin Lee and ex-legislators Albert Ho Chun-yan and Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee.
Former politicians Au Nok-hin and Leung Yiu-chung, who received 10 months behind bars and a suspended jail sentence, respectively, did not file an appeal.
The appeal court upheld the seven appellants’ convictions for the participation charge, but found insufficient evidence they had organised the unlawful procession.
