Sanctions against individuals – or economic sanctions at the country level – were among the “immature ideas” Hong Kong activist Andy Li “floated” to an international parliamentary alliance days before the 2020 national security law came into force, a court has heard at the high-profile trial of media mogul Jimmy Lai.
Li, the co-founder of activist group Fight for Freedom, Stand With Hong Kong (SWHK), which prosecutors allege was ultimately financed by Lai, continued to testify against the 76-year-old tycoon on Wednesday.
The founder of the defunct Apple Daily newspaper stands accused of conspiring to collude with foreign forces and conspiring to publish seditious materials, which could land him life behind bars if convicted.
According to the prosecution’s opening arguments, Lai had offered activist Li an advance payment to buy newspaper advertisements calling for sanctions on Hong Kong officials. Activists had placed ads in leading newspapers around the world in the wake of the 2019 anti-extradition bill protests to call for support for the Hong Kong pro-democracy movement.
Parliamentary alliance
On day 53 of the 80-day trial, prosecutors grilled Li about the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), created by UK campaigner Luke de Pulford on June 5, 2020. The global alliance – featuring legislators from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, France, Japan, the UK and other countries – has been a vocal critic of what they see as human rights violations in China.
Li told the court that he had helped IPAC build its website on a voluntary basis before its launch, and had lobbied politicians in Japan to join the alliance. Telegram messaging records shown by the prosecution showed that Li had asked de Pulford in late May 2020 if he needed media support from Hong Kong, to which the Conservative Party member said he was “briefing Jimmy L” and that he would give Li a press release.
Li confirmed with the court that “Jimmy L” was referring to the Apple Daily founder, but said he did not know why de Pulford would brief Lai.
Response to security law
He worked with IPAC in his personal capacity and was not representing SWHK, Li told the court. But the group later joined IPAC’s Central Secretariat, after members agreed that it would make their international lobbying work more efficient, he said.
In the run-up to the enactment of the Beijing-imposed security law in June 2020, SWHK and IPAC exchanged ideas on how to respond to the looming legislation, Telegram messaging records displayed in court showed.
De Pulford said on June 21, 2020 that some IPAC members did not want to propose lifeboat programmes for Hongkongers, saying such measures were equal to “admitting defeat.” He said their response should be sanctions-related, but he was worried that it would be “unlikely.”
Li’s verbatim reply to de Pulford read: “Magnitsky – sanction at individual level, or economic sanction at the country level, would have been the most powerful, and not unachievable if we get enough signatory MPs who raise this at parliaments.”
Li also suggested cancelling the special status of Hong Kong, referring to the treatment that was secured by the Hong Kong government from various jurisdictions which differentiated it from mainland China.
The conversation mentioned Hong Kong independence. However, Li testified on Wednesday that he believed at the time it should not be tabled as a response to the national security law. It would be “impractical diplomatically,” he said.
Li also suggested expelling Chinese students or other citizens from their home countries, but he remarked at the time that such a move would be “crazier than Magnitsky.”
“[A]t least Magnitsky hits perpetrators, not ordinary citizens,” his message read.
Li added he wanted to clarify that the suggestions he made in the group were all “immature ideas” he wanted others to discuss.
He will continue his testimony on Thursday.
When Lai’s trial began on December 18, 2023, he had already spent more than 1,000 days in custody after having had his bail revoked in December 2020. Three judges – handpicked by Hong Kong’s chief executive to hear national security cases – are presiding over Lai’s trial in the place of a jury, marking a departure from the city’s common law traditions.
Beijing inserted national security legislation directly into Hong Kong’s mini-constitution in June 2020 following a year of pro-democracy protests and unrest. It criminalised subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorist acts – broadly defined to include disruption to transport and other infrastructure. The move gave police sweeping new powers and led to hundreds of arrests amid new legal precedents, while dozens of civil society groups disappeared. The authorities say it restored stability and peace to the city, rejecting criticism from trade partners, the UN and NGOs.
Corrections:
28/03/2024 at 11:56 am: An earlier version of this article mistakenly stated that IPAC was co-founded by Luke de Pulford and Iain Duncan Smith. De Pulford is the creator of the group, whilst Smith is a co-chair. We regret the error.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
