For those familiar with the 2019 resistance movement in Hong Kong, images of mass protest and calls for freedom remain vivid. What is less known is the aftermath, the events that unfolded once the global spotlight faded. Among these developments, the trial of Apple Daily and its founder, Jimmy Lai, stands as a stark example of the changing political and legal landscape in Hong Kong.
Since its founding in 1995, Apple Daily was celebrated for its fearless journalism and outspoken pro-freedom stance. The newspaper played a pivotal role during the 2019 protests, becoming a symbol of free speech.
However, in 2021, the paper ceased operations after its assets were frozen under the National Security Law.
Jimmy Lai, a prominent businessman-turned-activist, is now on trial, accused of using Apple Daily as a platform to undermine national security.
The trial, which has been ongoing for nearly a year, has reached its 96th day.
Overview of the Case
The prosecution's case hinges on five key allegations, each focusing on Lai's role as the founder of Apple Daily and his political activities.
One. Lai’s Role in Apple Daily
The prosecution argues that Lai held ultimate control over the newspaper’s editorial direction, using it to further his pro-democracy agenda. Witnesses described the so-called "lunchbox meetings," where Lai allegedly provided direct instructions to senior editors.
A former executive characterized these meetings:
"Lai would set the tone for the week’s reporting, often focusing on maximizing coverage of key protests or international events. He was strong-willed, and his instructions were seen as final."
While some senior editorial staff testified that they had some autonomy, they also noted this autonomy was constrained within what they described as a "caged autonomy," with Lai as the ultimate decision-maker.
Two. Content of Apple Daily
The prosecution scrutinized Apple Daily’s editorial policies, particularly its English-language edition launched in 2020, alleging it was crafted to influence U.S. policymakers and stoke anti-China sentiment.
Former editor-in-chief of Apple Daily English News, Lo Fung, testified that Lai instructed the editorial team:
"Focus only on China’s negative stories. We’re not here to balance the narrative—we’re here to tell the world what they don’t want you to know."
Prosecutors presented this as evidence that Apple Daily functioned as a propaganda tool rather than a journalistic outlet.
Three. "One Person, One Letter, Save Hong Kong" Campaign
The "One Person, One Letter, Save Hong Kong" campaign, initiated by Apple Daily, was presented as evidence of collusion with foreign forces. The campaign encouraged readers to write to then-U.S. President Donald Trump, urging intervention against the National Security Law's implementation.
Four. Connections with International Figures
Lai’s online interview program featuring foreign commentators was another focal point. The prosecution argued that Lai used this platform to discuss sensitive political topics and potentially solicit foreign intervention.
The prosecution also highlighted Lai's meetings with U.S. officials, including former Vice President Mike Pence and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, as part of his alleged efforts to seek international support for sanctions against China.
Five. Financial Support for Activism
Lai’s alleged financial backing of pro-democracy groups like Stand with Hong Kong (SWHK) was scrutinized. SWHK played a key role in global advocacy for the movement, including lobbying for sanctions against Chinese officials.
A former activist testified:
"Lai’s companies provided crucial support for our ad campaigns. Without that funding, we couldn’t have achieved the global impact we did."
The prosecution contends this financial support constitutes collusion with foreign forces, a core charge under the National Security Law.
Jimmy Lai’s Testimony
Day 93
Day 93 marked the beginning of Lai's testimony in his own defense. The session focused heavily on Lai's background, the core values and editorial processes of Apple Daily, and his relationships with various individuals, including foreign politicians and dignitaries.
Lai explained his decision to transition from a successful career in fashion with Giordano to the media industry stemmed from the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. He stated that, as a businessman who had achieved some financial success, he saw starting a newspaper as a way to promote freedom. He believed access to information was key to achieving greater freedom, stating:
"The more information you have, the more you are in the know, the freer you are."
Lai described the core values of Apple Daily as reflecting those of the Hong Kong people, particularly those who valued democracy and freedom. He stated that these values included the rule of law, democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and opposition to violence and opposition to Hong Kong independence. Lai stated he believed these values stemmed from Hong Kong's history under British governance.
Lai emphasized his opposition to Hong Kong independence, calling it a "conspiracy" designed to entrap people. He stated he considered the idea "too crazy" to even consider and forbade his staff from mentioning it in the newspaper. He said:
"The advocacy of independence of Hong Kong is a conspiracy because people just want us to get us into the trap. That was never a reality. That was too crazy to think about this, that’s why I never allow any of our staff or the newspaper to mention about this."
Responding to accusations of "poisoning" readers, Lai said, "I don’t think I have ability to pollute or corrupt the mind of the Hong Kong people just by my writing."
Lai acknowledged donating to think tanks in the US but denied that these donations were intended to influence US policy towards China. He asserted that his donations were relatively small compared to others and made without any expectation of a return. He stated, "If I ask for something in return that will be too presumptuous... I think this is crazy."
Day 94
Day 94 of the trial continued Lai's testimony under examination by his defense counsel. The focus of the day's proceedings shifted from Lai's personal background and political beliefs to his role in Apple Daily's editorial processes and his relationships with key staff members.
In response to the defense's reference to his May 29, 2020, article published in New York Times, titled "Do My Tweets Really Threaten China’s National Security?" Lai elaborated on his grave concerns regarding the National Security Law. He explained that the provisions were sweeping and ambiguously worded, granting authorities significant leeway for arbitrary interpretation. This ambiguity, he noted, created a chilling effect, suppressing free speech and enabling the prosecution of individuals for dissenting views. he emphasized that the law’s vague language would severely restrict freedom of expression, leading to widespread self-censorship and eroding Hong Kong's tradition of robust civil liberties.
As a leading pro-democracy publication, Apple Daily was particularly susceptible to the law's expansive reach. Lai expressed his fear that the NSL could be weaponized to silence the newspaper, either through direct legal action or by intimidating its staff and contributors. These concerns, he argued, underscored the existential threat the NSL posed to Apple Daily and Hong Kong's free press.
The defense team highlighted testimony from former Apple Daily CEO Cheung Kim-Hung, who alleged that Lai had instructed him to continue operating the newspaper as usual while Lai was in custody. Lai vehemently denied this accusation, asserting that issuing such instructions under the constraints of the National Security Law would have been both irresponsible and reckless. To support his position, Lai pointed to a letter he had written to the newspaper's staff, emphasizing caution and prioritizing their safety. He argued that this letter was consistent with his stance and demonstrated that he would not have encouraged actions that could endanger his colleagues.
The defense then referenced communications between Lai and Apple Daily’s former Deputy Publisher Chan Pui-man, highlighting Lai’s practice of forwarding articles and suggestions for editorial consideration. Lai testified that he forwarded an article written by Benedict Rogers, the head of Hong Kong Watch, to Chan, leaving it to her discretion to determine its relevance. Lai stated that he often shared articles from others if he believed they might be useful but stressed that the ultimate decision always rested with the editorial staff.
The defense also cited messages exchanged between Lai and Chan regarding the July 1 Legislative Council incident. Lai expressed his concern over the impact of the storming of the Legislative Council Complex by young protesters, stating,
"The young people storming Legislative Council weighed heavily on my heart. What do you think the pro-democracy camp can do afterward to ensure the movement continues? Fortunately, the public seems to have some sympathy for the young people breaking into Legislative Council Complex, so the damage might not be too severe. What do you think?"
In court, Lai clarified that his comments were not editorial directives but suggestions. He explained that he was worried the incident might harm the broader movement and wanted to highlight the perspectives of young protesters to garner public understanding and sympathy. Lai reiterated that his intention was to focus on reporting the thoughts and motivations of the youth, rather than issuing any orders about how the story should be covered.
"Some people may subjectively interpret this as an instruction, but I emphasize that it was merely a suggestion," said Lai.
He also emphasized that, while he did not consider the Legislative Council Complex storming an act of severe violence, citing the absence of injuries, the incident still involved vandalism and illegal actions, which he did not condone.
Lai also addressed a message he sent to Chan after the implementation of the National Security Law, which included a link to Trump's executive order on Hong Kong and the suggestion to "work up a shit list on those involved in censorship."
Lai explained in court that he receives numerous messages daily, many of which he does not have the time to thoroughly read. He stated that he only fully read the message for the first time during the trial. He noted that the message in question, containing a reference to a "shit list," and emphasized that the language used in the message was not his own, saying, “it’s not the kind of language that I would use.” He added that the message was forwarded to Chan without any follow-up or acknowledgment from her, and it was possible she had not even read it.
Lai further testified that he also forwarded the same message to other pro-democracy figures, including former Democratic Party chairman Yeung Sum and former Labour Party chairman Lee Cheuk-yan. When the defense asked if Lai had instructed these individuals to create a "shit list," Lai dismissed the notion as "ridiculous." The court also reviewed evidence showing Lai had sent the same message to multiple contacts, reinforcing his claim that he merely passed on the information without specific instructions or intentions tied to the message.
The prosecution questioned Lai about his use of the encrypted messaging app Signal and his decision to forward messages he had described as "confidential." Lai clarified that his use of the term "confidential" referred to the app's encrypted nature, acknowledging that this might not have been the most precise choice of words. He emphasized that he only shared information through Signal with close friends and trusted individuals, underscoring that these communications were not meant for broader dissemination.
In response to questions about his April 28, 2019, article, "Stand Up for Our Last Line of Defense" Jimmy Lai denied intending to incite hatred, contempt, or dissatisfaction toward the Hong Kong government. He explained that the article merely projected potential consequences of implementing the extradition law and argued that many of his predictions had come true. Lai described the law as creating an environment of fear and compliance among Hong Kong citizens, undermining the city’s rule of law and replacing it with authoritarian rule.
Lai also addressed his May 5, 2019, article, "Think About Emigrating or Protesting," in which he called for mass protests against the extradition bill. He argued that peaceful demonstrations could pressure officials to reconsider the law. Lai maintained that he did not seek to incite hatred but used examples to encourage lawful protest, emphasizing his opposition to violence.
Day 95
Day 95 of the trial saw Lai continue his testimony, with the defense focusing on articles Lai wrote for his Apple Daily column and the newspaper's English edition.
Regarding the "One Person, One Letter, Save Hong Kong" campaign and his use of the term "lobbying" in his newspaper column, Lai asserted that it referred to advocating for peaceful, non-violent, and patient protests against the extradition bill. He denied that "lobbying" included any requests for sanctions.
The defense addressed a column dated October 27, 2019, titled "What Americans Tell Us", written by Apple Daily editorial staff in a Q&A style. In the article, Lai discussed the importance of “constant lobbying” to garner international support for Hong Kong.
Here's a quote from the column, highlighting the use of the word "lobbying":
"To get the support of foreigners, we need to keep lobbying. Plus media reports, let them understand our morality, courage, conscience, let them speak out in their lives, support will only grow, not decrease, as long as we do our part, to touch their conscience with moral force."
Lai also added that:
"If anyone construes as otherwise, they have right to be wrong, and I’m not to gainsay it. For truth prevails in God’s kingdom, and that’s good enough for me. So do we have to review and question each and every article if my position is like this?"
The defense then highlighted an article published on December 22, 2019, in which Lai discussed the importance of the district council election victory, describing it as a source of hope to reduce violence among young protesters. He wrote:
"The best landslide which we totally had in the district council that gave the young people hope. You know, if we unite together, we can be together, become a great political resistance force. And this will give them hope to reduce violence in the street."
The defense questioned Lai on a comment he made in a January 5, 2020, article where he expressed admiration for a young girl who shouted obscenities at the police, stating, "With youngsters like this, we cannot lose." Lai acknowledged that the comment, made in the heat of the moment, was in "bad taste" and offensive, expressed regret and apologized for it.
In another article, Our Finest Hour, Lai quoted Winston Churchill:
"We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender."
The prosecution argued that invoking the wartime context of Churchill's speech implied an encouragement of violence in Hong Kong. Lai, however, firmly disagreed. He explained that, in the Hong Kong context, the "enemy" referred to China's encroachment on Hong Kong's freedoms rather than a military foe, and the resistance he advocated was entirely peaceful. Lai stated:
"Hong Kong is not at war. My use of Churchill’s words was meant to inspire courage and resilience in the face of oppression, not violence."
On the topic of Apple Daily’s English News, Lai explained that the initial suggestion came from Christian Whiton, a former U.S. State Department advisor. Whiton proposed publishing an English-language newspaper and distributing it globally, but Lai initially dismissed the idea as impractical and prohibitively costly. However, Lai later reconsidered and opted for an online edition of Apple Daily English News. He envisioned the platform as a way to fill critical gaps left by other outlets, such as the South China Morning Post, particularly in covering human rights and governance issues with greater transparency and focus.
Lai emphasized the English News’ dedication to truthful reporting, denying accusations that it deliberately suppressed balanced perspectives, or provoke hostility toward the Chinese or Hong Kong governments.
Lai acknowledged that he suggested focusing on the perspectives of Hong Kong people, particularly those critical of the government and China. He explained that the English edition had to prioritize certain news items. He stated:
"We have like maybe 20 items of news… so, you know, we have to choose what is to the point or what we want."
Day 96
On Day 96 of the trial of Jimmy Lai, the defense focused on refuting testimony from prosecution witnesses, clarifying Lai's role in editorial decisions, and addressing his use of communication platforms such as Slack and Twitter.
Lai acknowledged the need for a distinctive voice in English news to break the monopoly of outlets like the South China Morning Post. Lai admitted that Apple Daily prioritized content aligned with the pro-democracy movement and critical of Beijing but denied that this constituted propaganda. He explained:
"Reporting the truth is not the same as balanced reporting. Our responsibility was to reflect the reality of Hong Kong’s struggle for freedom."
In a WhatsApp message presented as evidence, Lai wrote:
"We’re not trying to balance perspectives but to amplify the voice of those protecting Hong Kong. This is the voice the world wants to know."
Lai also suggested using big data to fact-check exaggerated claims about China, whether positive or negative. However, he admitted these plans were not fully realized due to technical challenges.
"The aim was to use data to reveal the truth about China, not to distort or manipulate reporting."
Former Apple Daily CEO Cheung Kim-Hung had testified that Lai directed the English edition to focus on topics like "resistance, protests, and sanctions." Lai firmly denied the claim, and stated:
"I never discussed sanctions with Cheung. His testimony is fabricated."
The defense introduced Slack records to counter allegations that Lai gave specific editorial directives during “lunchbox meetings.” These records show Lai frequently solicited suggestions from attendees rather than issuing instructions. The Slack messages demonstrated a collaborative process where participants exchanged ideas, and meeting summaries were prepared afterward.
Lai reiterated:
"In all lunchbox meetings, I never discussed specific editorial instructions. The meeting records already summarize all feasible suggestions."
Lai explained that the Slack platform, used by Apple Daily for internal communications, was managed by his secretary, Julie, who set up groups and facilitated discussions.
The defense team also noted discrepancies in the prosecution’s timeline regarding lunchbox meetings and Slack communications, arguing that the prosecution’s evidence lacked contextual accuracy.
Regarding Lai’s twitter activities, his account was managed by Simon Lee, an assistant CEO at Apple Daily and Lai's mentee. Lai described Lee's role as primarily logistical, such as editing tweets, adding hashtags, and managing follower lists. Lai acknowledged discussions about hashtags like #HongKongNeedsHelp but emphasized that these were coordinated by Lee and not directly crafted by him.
In case you are wondering who is the "Simon Lee" managing Jimmy Lai's twitter account. That's me. Thank you for joining me today to follow the ongoing trial of Jimmy Lai. I’ll be back with more updates. Until next time, take care and stay informed.
Share this post