Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai, who faces charges including “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces,” appeared in court Wednesday for the 128th day of his trial at West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court, which is serving as the temporary High Court. It marked Lai’s 36th day of testimony and the 10th day of cross-examination by the prosecution.

The prosecution referenced earlier testimony from co-defendant Chan Tsz-wah, who said that in December 2019, Lai discussed the benefits of the primary election with him and urged him to encourage young people to pay attention to the matter. However, during direct examination, Lai denied making such remarks, insisting he had not focused on the primaries.

Prosecutors presented messages showing that earlier in December 2019, Lai discussed the primaries with Democratic Party member Lee Wing-tat and asked him to contact his protégé, Simon Lee, saying Simon was familiar with voting software and could assist. Lai confirmed introducing Simon Lee to Lee Wing-tat but said he could not recall who first brought up the primary election, only that he had heard discussions about it within the pro-democracy camp.

The case is being heard by National Security Law-designated judges Esther Toh Lye-ping, Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios, and Alex Lee Wan-tang. The prosecution team includes Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Anthony Chau Tin-hang, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Ivan Cheung Cheuk-kan, and Senior Public Prosecutor Crystal Chan Wing-sum. Lai is represented by Senior Counsel Robert Pang Yiu-hung, barrister Steven Kwan Man-wai, and New Zealand King’s Counsel Marc Corlett, who is also licensed to practice in Hong Kong.

Detailed Transcription

16:32 Court Adjourns

15:51 Lai Acknowledges Caring About 2020 Primaries, Says ‘All Pro-Democracy People Were Concerned’

The prosecution continued questioning Jimmy Lai regarding his February 26, 2020, conversation with Chan Tsz-wah about the primary election candidate list.

The prosecution pointed out that Lai had forwarded the message to Lee Cheuk-yan. The court displayed the response from Lee, which read: “Will work on them, will tell Benny and Au Nok-hin.” The prosecution asked whether Lee was working with Benny Tai and Au Nok-hin on the primaries. Lai disagreed, stating that as far as he knew, Lee was not involved in organizing the primaries. However, he admitted that Tai and Au were responsible for the primaries, which is why Lee said he would inform them.

The prosecution asked whether Lai remained interested in the primaries after forwarding the message. Lai responded that he was interested but not actively involved, which is why Apple Daily provided a platform.

Judge Alex Lee asked whether Lai “cared” about the primaries. Lai confirmed but reiterated that he was not involved in the organization.

The prosecution then presented a March 3, 2020, conversation between Lai and Lee Wing-tat, where Lai mentioned meeting with Simon Lee, who noted that Benny Tai’s progress on the primaries was “a bit slow.” Lai explained in court that he had learned this from Simon Lee and therefore asked Lee Wing-tat to follow up.

Judge Alex Lee asked whether Lai knew that Simon Lee was still involved in the primaries at the time. Lai replied that Simon Lee was likely finishing his work but was probably still part of the discussions.

Judge Esther Toh pressed further, asking if Lai was still following the primaries in March 2020. Lai admitted that he was still interested.

Judge Lee noted that by March 3, 2020, the electronic voting system for the primaries had not yet been abandoned. Lai confirmed this, explaining that Simon Lee was still involved at the time. Judge Lee also referred to Lai’s earlier testimony, in which he denied discussing the voting system pricing with Chan Tsz-wah in Taiwan in January, stating that Benny Tai had already taken over the matter and rejected electronic voting.

Judge Lee questioned whether the final decision to abandon electronic voting had been made in January. Lai responded that Simon Lee was still attending meetings related to the topic at that time.

Judge Lee concluded that the primaries ultimately did not adopt electronic voting, which Lai confirmed, adding that Tai and Au Nok-hin were initially interested in the idea but later changed their minds. The prosecution pointed out that during Lai’s Taipei meeting in January 2020, the decision to abandon electronic voting had not yet been finalized. Lai agreed, admitting that he might have misremembered.

The prosecution asked whether Lai might have mentioned the voting system pricing to Chan and Lau Tsz-kin at the meeting. Lai denied this, stating that the matter was unrelated to them and that his main focus at the time was advising Lau on organizing a leadership team.

The prosecution then presented a message from Lee Wing-tat to Lai, which stated: “Also, we will have a meeting with Benny Tai and Au Nok-hin this Saturday. We will push them to expedite the primary election plan.” The prosecution asked whether Lee was accelerating the primaries at Lai’s request. Lai agreed.

The prosecution then asked whether Lai continued to follow the primaries after March 2020. Lai claimed he did not remember.

The prosecution pointed out that the primaries took place in July 2020 and asked whether Lai remained engaged between March and July. Lai admitted he was following developments because Apple Daily had provided a platform for coverage.

The prosecution then presented a conversation between Lai and Lee Cheuk-yan on July 1, 2020, after the National Security Law had taken effect. Lai wrote:

“With the National Security Law in place, ‘yellow shops’ are unwilling to serve as polling stations, and fewer people would be willing to register with their ID cards at polling stations. Now that Benny doesn’t even have a concrete plan, it’s impossible to proceed as expected. The only option is to return to online voting.”

“Difficult yes, but now Benny’s case is impossible as Tat alerted. We’ve to change gear. Let’s talk more tonight to salvage the situation. It’s salvageable.”

Lai testified that after the enactment of the National Security Law, Tai faced difficulties, leading to discussions about the possibility of using electronic voting.

The prosecution asked whether Lai wanted the primaries to continue. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution then asked whether Lai was actively following the primaries. Lai replied that it was not just him—“all pro-democracy people were concerned.”

15:29 Break

15:05 Lai Previously Claimed Not to Have Paid Attention to Primaries—Judge Presses, Lai Admits to Following Developments

The prosecution presented a conversation between Jimmy Lai and Chan Tsz-wah on February 26, 2020:

Chan Tsz-wah:
“Democratic Alliance: Confirmed plan. They are not bound by primary.
New Territories West: Eddie Chu
New Territories East: Stand News’ Sister (Ah Lam)
Kowloon East: Joshua Wong (Plan B: Jannelle Rosalynne Leung)
Kowloon West: Sunny
Hong Kong Island: Nathan Law
Super District: Lester Shum”

Jimmy Lai:
“Thanks. We’ve to work on them. But if the primacy (primary) has legitimacy, they will have to join. Let’s see.”

Chan Tsz-wah:
“I will try my best to work on it. At least not to let them ruin it.”

Jimmy Lai:
“Yes, we all have to work on it. Thanks.”

Judge Esther Toh questioned whether the “we” mentioned by Lai included himself. Lai explained that he was responding to Chan’s statement that he would “try his best to work on it.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai was still actively engaged in the primaries at the time. Lai claimed he was not closely familiar with the individuals mentioned in the message and described Chan’s reference to the primary election as “out of the blue.”

The prosecution pointed out that Lai’s statement—”if the primary has legitimacy, they will have to join”—indicated that he had been following the primary’s developments. Lai admitted he knew the primary was being prepared but claimed he was unaware of the details.

The prosecution argued that the primary was not something unexpected but rather something Lai had been tracking. Judge Susana D’Almada Remedios added that the prosecution’s point was that Chan Tsz-wah’s message was not an isolated statement but part of an ongoing discussion between him and Lai. Lai responded that he had not known of Chan’s connections to the primary election, which is why he found the message surprising.

Judge Remedios pressed whether the topic of the primary had been an ongoing discussion between Lai and Chan. Lai eventually agreed but reiterated that he was surprised by the level of detail Chan provided.

The prosecution then referred to Lai’s earlier claim that he had not been paying attention to the primaries, stating that his messages suggested otherwise. Lai responded, “I was concerned about what was going on, but I was not concerned about the primary anymore because I wasn’t involved.”

The prosecution countered, asking why Lai continued to follow the matter and attended dinners with key pro-democracy figures if he was not concerned about the primary. Lai replied that those events had taken place earlier.

Judge Alex Lee noted that on February 25, one day before Chan’s message, Mark Simon had informed Lai that he was arranging meetings with the U.S. government but later canceled them because Lai could not leave Hong Kong. Simon had also said, “I think you will be asked what the U.S. can do to urge Beijing to be honest during the elections.”

Lee asked whether Lai had expected U.S. officials to question him about the primaries if he had traveled to the U.S. Lai agreed.

Judge Lee then asked, “So, on February 25, you were concerned about the primary, but by February 26, you were not?” Lai responded, “Why would I have been concerned on February 25?”

Judge Lee pointed out that on that day, Lai had received a message from Mark Simon about U.S. meetings. Lai replied, “Of course, I would have told them about the election, but that doesn’t mean I was concerned about it because people were already handling it, and I was not involved.”

Judge Lee clarified, “We are not saying that you were the organizer of the primary election. We are saying that you were showing an interest in it.” Lai responded, “Maybe I shouldn’t have used the word ‘concerned,’ but at the time, I truly didn’t care and was not involved.”

Judge Toh asked, “Then, were you interested in the primaries at that time?” Lai agreed.

The prosecution then argued that Lai understood the meaning of “concerned” and had not been truthful in stating he was not concerned about the primaries. Lai reiterated, “Personally, I was not concerned about the primaries. But overall, was I interested? Yes, I was interested. If you think I was lying, you are free to think so.”

The prosecution pressed Lai further on his views on the primaries in 2020. Lai stated that his level of interest depended on who he was dealing with. “If you think that’s illogical, that’s all I can say.”

Judge Toh asked, “When you told Chan Tsz-wah, ‘Yes, we all have to work on it,’ were you concerned about the primary at that moment?” Lai replied, “Okay, if you put it that way, yes.”

Judge Remedios then concluded, “So, when discussing the primary with Chan Tsz-wah, you were paying attention to it?” Lai agreed.

14:50 Lai Confirms Mark Simon Obtained Information from Pence’s Aides

The prosecution presented a conversation between Lai and Lee Wing-tat on January 28, 2020, in which Lee stated:

“We (Benny, Lee Cheuk-yan, Simon, and I) just met to discuss the primary election. Very fruitful.” 

The prosecution asked if Lai had met with Benny Tai at the time. Lai denied it, stating that he had only met Tai a few times in 2019 or earlier and that they had never communicated via WhatsApp or phone calls.

The prosecution then presented a message from February 3, 2020, where Lai asked Lee Wing-tat:

“Can we gather a few key figures to follow up on the primary election?”

Lee responded: “Sure.” He then listed the names of those invited to the dinner, including:

“Martin, Albert, Yan, Tallman, Ho-ming, and I” (Lee Chu-ming, Ho Chun-yan, Lee Cheuk-yan, Lam Cheuk-ting, Wong Ho-ming, and myself).

The prosecution asked if Lai had proactively requested updates on the primary election. Lai agreed, confirming that the term “key figures” referred to Lee Cheuk-yan, Wong Ho-ming, and others.

However, Lai stated that these individuals were not directly involved in the preparation of the primary election. When asked why he met with them, Lai explained that they were aware of its preparations.

The prosecution then presented a February 2020 message from Mark Simon to Lai, stating:

“VP Pence and senior staff read your piece in WSJ. NSC staff told me Friday when I spoke with them in follow-up to a meeting several days earlier. They are anxious to see you when here. I was quite surprised at the level of knowledge they have about the Pan-Dem primary, and I think you’re going to be asked about what, if anything, the U.S. can do to press Beijing to keep things honest during the election.”

The prosecution asked whether the U.S. government was eager to learn about the primary election. Lai agreed that the message indicated such interest.

The prosecution then inquired whether “they” referred to Pence and senior staff. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution further asked why Mark Simon expressed surprise in his message. Lai explained that it was unexpected how quickly the U.S. had gained such knowledge about the primary election and that anyone would have been surprised by it.

The prosecution suggested that Mark Simon had received inside information from the U.S. government, possibly even from Pence himself. Lai clarified that the information came from Pence’s aides, not from Pence directly.

14:32 Lai Denies Funding the Primary Election

Regarding the January 2020 meeting in Taipei between Lai, Chan Tsz-wah, and Finn Lau, Chan had previously testified that Lai mentioned “wanting to learn from the U.S. model” and had received a price quote from a European company that specialized in voting software, stating, “It was only over a hundred thousand, not expensive.” Chan also testified that Lai said he would financially support the primary election.

The prosecution asked whether Lai discussed the primary election at the meeting. Lai responded that he did not remember, suggesting that Finn Lau may have mentioned it, and he had participated in the discussion.

The prosecution pressed further, asking whether Lai talked about the software price quote. Lai firmly denied this, stating that by that time, Benny Tai had already taken over the primary election planning and had rejected electronic voting, meaning there was no reason for him to bring up the price quote.

The prosecution then asked if Lai had suggested that Finn Lau participate in the primary as an independent candidate. Lai said he did not recall, but logically, Finn Lau would not have participated because he was in the U.K.

When the prosecution asserted that Lai had stated he would fund the primary, Lai denied it, emphasizing that he was not involved in the primary election.

The prosecution further asked whether Lai had stopped being involved in primary preparations after January 2020. Lai said he did not remember the exact timeline. When asked whether he had been updated on the primary election’s progress afterward, Lai responded that even if he had been informed, it was only briefly mentioned over meals with pro-democracy figures.

Lai denied financially supporting the primary election but confirmed that Apple Daily had served as a platform for primary election forums.

13:03 Lunch

12:45 Lai Confirms Inquiring About Primary Election Voting Software Price Quote Progress

Regarding Mark Simon’s message to Lai stating that “it is necessary to explain the primary election to people in Washington,” the prosecution asked whether Lai had traveled to the U.S. to explain the primary election. Lai responded that he had not gone to Washington.

The prosecution then asked whether Lai had used other means, such as electronic communication, to contact the U.S. regarding the primary. Lai denied doing so.

The prosecution presented a January 11, 2020, conversation between Lai and Simon Lee, in which Lee stated:

“I am going back and forth with the solution provider for the electoral software. I make it clear to them they should expect 國家級 (state-level) hacker and attack. They replied that it is first and foremost what they help people with.”

The prosecution asked if the electoral software referred to the primary election software. Lai confirmed it did.

The prosecution then inquired whether Simon Lee was reporting details of the software to Lai. Lai responded that Lee was simply keeping him informed of what he was searching for.

Additionally, the prosecution asked whether they had requested a price quote from a company for the e-voting system. Lai initially denied it. However, the prosecution presented a December 30, 2019, message from Simon Lee to Lai, stating:

“I sent the company a request for quotation.”

Lai then acknowledged that a quote had been requested but emphasized that it was ultimately not used, so it was not significant.

On the same day, Lai had messaged Lee:

“Simon, Know that you’re in the US with family for holiday, sorry to disturb. Do we have the price quote from e-voting company yet? Has there been progress with Pan Democrat? Thanks. Jimmy.”

Lee replied:

“I met with Lee Wing-tat and Lee Cheuk-yan and discussed the details like timing of the primary elections and how they want to do it. I sent the details to the contractor and waiting for their proposal. Initially, they quoted me approximately $80,000 USD for the voting part. But there will be other costs for SMS, etc. They are finalizing the cost and will let me know.”

Lai confirmed that he had inquired about the progress of the price quote and had responded “Okay” to Lee’s message, stressing that he had simply forgotten about it earlier.

12:30 Prosecution Cites Messages Indicating Mark Simon Suggested Lai Go to Washington to Explain the Primary Election

The prosecution presented a January 5, 2020, WhatsApp message from Mark Simon in a group chat that included Jimmy Lai and Martin Lee, stating:

“White House took notice of District Council elections and Pence thought a great sign. They think it worthwhile to learn more about Democrats Primary plan – Many think it’s important for actual elected HK politicians to represent HK on details of HK actions in DC, while hearing from Senior figures/Opinion leaders on big picture/what US can do.”

Lai confirmed that the message was related to the primary election.

The prosecution then asked whether the US government was interested in learning about the primary election. Lai replied that this was what Mark Simon’s message conveyed.

The prosecution further inquired whether the US side wanted to hear from Lai specifically. Lai responded that it was not just him but also other senior figures who were being sought for information.

The prosecution then presented another message from Mark Simon to Lai, stating:

“Idea of democratic primary in HK is very popular in DC. So maybe it needs to be explained by you or a senior, who is not running for office, to folks in DC. (The activists who lobby DC are not talking about it as logical conclusion is if they don’t win seats, they don’t get to come to DC to lobby.)”

The prosecution argued that, based on Mark Simon’s messages, Lai was aware of the primary election and could serve as a representative to discuss it in Washington. Lai responded that he could be one of the representatives.

12:11 Lai Agrees That the Primary Election Was Part of the Resistance Movement

The prosecution continued to cite Jimmy Lai’s article, which stated:

“In addition to continuing the resistance movement, next year’s Legislative Council election is our next goal following the victory in the district council elections. The most concerning issue in achieving this goal is the malicious act of infiltrators using vote-splitting to dilute the pro-democracy vote. Lee Wing-tat said the most effective way to prevent such vote-splitting is for the pro-democracy camp to hold a primary election to select candidates. This is a good idea, and using mobile electronic voting software can ensure there is no risk of duplicate voting—it is both convenient and accurate. I believe that since Lee Wing-tat proposed this idea, it must already be a method recognized and seriously considered by the pro-democracy camp. This is good; as long as we prepare well, success will be within reach. The future looks optimistic, and we must persist.”

Lai confirmed that he mentioned Lee Wing-tat in the article, described the primary election as a good idea, and referred to electronic voting.

The prosecution then asked if Lai had already known about the primary election before December 12, 2019. Lai responded that the topic had already been discussed at that time and confirmed his support for the idea.

The prosecution next presented a December 30, 2019, message exchange between Lai and Lee Wing-tat:

• Lai: “Tat, Simon Lee is unavailable for contact as he has gone to the U.S. for the holidays. How is the e-voting process going, and what about the New Year’s Day march? Thanks. Jimmy.”
• Lee: “Jimmy, we have found Pastor Yuan Tin-yau, Chung Kim-wah, and Au Nok-hin to establish a discussion platform. We will have a meeting on the 2nd or 3rd. Then, we will take some time to allow independent candidates to participate in discussions. I hope the first trial of the Legislative Council primary election can be completed within February.”

Lai stated that he did not know Pastor Yuan Tin-yau or Chung Kim-wah and had only met Au Nok-hin once when Au visited his office. He also clarified that at the time of this message exchange, he had not yet met Au.

The prosecution then cited the message from Lee Wing-tat, which mentioned the platform related to the primary election. Lai confirmed this.

On the same day, Lai replied to Lee Wing-tat:

“We’ve to do the primary as close to the Sept election as possible. But we can start the primary barnstorming as soon as possible. This allows those who’re interested to have enough time. This will arouse HK people’s interest and keep them focused on it. We can arrange these barnstorming debates in town halls of each district council… This can also be a chain of continuous activities as part of the resistance movement.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai’s use of “we” in the message meant that he was personally involved in preparing for the primary election. Lai denied this, stating that he was speaking from the perspective of the pro-democracy camp.

The prosecution further asked whether the primary election was part of the resistance movement. Lai responded, “You could say that,” adding that LegCo actions were part of the movement.

The prosecution then cited another message from Lai:

“They now propose to have a couple of trials of the primary.”

The prosecution asked whether “they” referred to people from the U.S. Lai denied this, stating that the primary election was a local matter.

11:15 Prosecution Cites Article to Question Whether Lai Sought to Continue the Resistance Movement Through ‘Legislative, Street, and International’ Fronts

The prosecution presented an article written by Jimmy Lai on December 22, 2019, titled “We Must Persist to Have Hope.” The article stated:

“Even though Carrie Lam has lost all credibility and remains in office only as a puppet, at this point, whether she steps down is no longer significant. What we seek is universal suffrage. The revolution of our times has yet to succeed, and our resistance movement must continue. The landslide victory in the district council elections has awakened the public to the fact that if we stand united, legislative politics can be a powerful force in our struggle. Our freedom can be saved by ourselves. Furthermore, young people now see a form of resistance beyond the streets, which has given them hope for the future and reduced the urgency and pressure of their street protests…”

The prosecution questioned Lai on his statement, “Our resistance movement must continue.” They asked whether he intended to persist in the resistance movement, to which Lai confirmed.

The prosecution further pressed whether Lai aimed to continue the resistance through the ‘Legislative Front,’ ‘Street Front,’ and ‘International Front.’ Lai responded that he merely meant to show “young people an alternative form of resistance beyond the streets.”

The prosecution then referred to Chan Tsz-wah’s testimony, which stated that during a November 27, 2019, meeting between Lai and Chan, Lai had allegedly mentioned “combining street, legislative, and international forces in action.” The prosecution asked if Lai had indeed discussed these three fronts with Chan. Lai stated he did not remember.

The prosecution followed up, asking whether Lai again mentioned the three fronts when meeting Chan in Taiwan in January 2020. Lai responded that he might have.

10:30 Prosecution Questions Whether Lai Paid for Primary Election Voting Software – Lai Says He Only Purchased Testing Software

The prosecution presented messages exchanged between Lai and Simon Lee after a dinner with pan-democrats, in which Lai stated:

“Simon, They found it very useful. Do you know how much is the cost per campaign? Thanks. What if the guy has a few phones, can we trace the user name and prohibit repeat voting? Thanks. Jimmy”

Lai later sent additional messages to Simon Lee:

“Simon, Have Lee Wing-tat contacted you? They might need you to set up and manage the e-voting process for them. Thanks. Jimmy.”

“Simon, Any cost that accrued to you on the work, please charge to me. I’ll have Mark take care of it. Thanks. Jimmy.”

The prosecution asked if Lai was offering to pay for the software setup costs, given his message stating, “please charge me for the work.” Lai responded that he was not referring to the cost of the primary election voting software but rather to the purchase of software for testing purposes.

The prosecution challenged this explanation, pointing out that Lai’s message referenced “setting up and managing the e-voting process,” suggesting that the expenses were related to the primary election’s electronic voting process. Lai reiterated that the purchase was for testing software and that he did not know the cost of the actual primary election software at the time.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked whether Lai agreed that his messages seemed to be related to managing the costs of the primary election. Lai admitted, “It sounds like that.”

The prosecution then remarked that Lai appeared “enthusiastic” about handling the voting software. Lai replied that he was just trying to ensure that things worked properly. Judge Esther Toh Lye-ping interjected, “So your answer is yes?” Lai agreed.

Judge Alex Lee then reminded Lai, “Mr. Lai, if you agree with the prosecution’s point, just answer ‘yes.’ It will save a lot of time. You don’t need to explain your charitable actions or usual practices.”

Lai responded, “But that doesn’t mean I was very eager (about the primary election).” He emphasized that he was not enthusiastic about it, only ensuring things were functional.

The prosecution then asserted that Lai was, in fact, aware of the primary election. Lai replied, “Of course I was aware.”

Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios added that since Lai was accused of discussing the primary election with co-defendant Chan Tsz-wah and had previously testified that he was unaware or uninvolved, the prosecution was merely clarifying his position.

Judge Remedios asked, “So now your position is that you were aware of the primary election?” Lai responded, “If you put it that way, I agree.”

The prosecution noted that Chan Tsz-wah testified that Lai discussed the primary election during their fourth meeting, yet Lai previously stated he had no involvement or awareness of the primary election. They questioned whether Lai was withholding the truth.

Lai retorted, “Why would I lie about this?” He maintained that he “did not pay much attention to the primary election when speaking with Chan,” as it had nothing to do with him. La said, “The fact is I’m telling the truth. But anyway, it doesn’t matter.”

10:20 Lai Confirms Discussing Costs with Simon Lee After He Identified Voting Software

The prosecution referenced a message from James Cunningham sent on November 25 of the same year, mentioning the Legislative Council election and “a path to getting inside the CE process.” The prosecution asked Lai whether he had forwarded Cunningham’s message to other pan-democrats. Lai replied that he did not remember and stated that he had not informed other pan-democrats, emphasizing that the primary election proposed by the pan-democrats was unrelated to Cunningham’s message. He explained that, at the time, there were concerns about “false candidates” running to split votes, which led to Benny Tai beginning to organize the primary election.

The prosecution then asked why Simon Lee was involved in the primary election. Lai responded that Lee was not involved in the primary election itself but had only suggested the use of online voting and had previously mentioned this idea to his colleagues. When asked if he had discussed this matter with Lee before Lee made the suggestion, Lai stated that he had not and that he was unaware of Lee’s idea before it was proposed.

The prosecution presented a message sent by Lai to Simon Lee on December 12, 2019:

“Simon, Please call back. I need your help finding electronic voting software. Thanks. Jimmy.”

The prosecution questioned whether it was Lai who had requested Lee to find voting software. Lai countered that Lee had already mentioned electronic voting software before this message. Under further questioning, Lai stated that the day after sending this message, he had lunch with pan-democrats, where they agreed to use online voting software. A few days later, he then instructed Lee Wing-tat to contact Simon Lee.

The prosecution pointed out that, after finding the software, Simon Lee discussed costs with Lai. Lai confirmed this.

The prosecution further inquired who was present at the pan-democratic luncheon on that day. Lai listed Lam Cheuk-ting, Lee Wing-tat, and Lee Cheuk-yan among those present. The prosecution asked whether Benny Tai and Au Nok-hin were also there. Lai responded that they were not.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang interrupted, stating that he would not rely on his knowledge from presiding over another case but noted that the luncheons involving Benny Tai and Au Nok-hin had started in January 2020. Lai reiterated that he was not familiar with them.

Court records indicate that Benny Tai and Au Nok-hin were identified as key organizers of the primary election. The court previously ruled that Tai was the “mastermind and primary driver” behind the ’35+ Plan,’ while Au played a crucial role in assisting Tai and was consistently aware of his objectives.

10:10 Lai Confirms Introducing Simon Lee to Lee Wing-tat to Assist in Selecting Primary Election Voting Software

The prosecution questioned Lai regarding his conversations with co-defendant Chan Tsz-wah about the primary election. Chan previously testified that during his fourth meeting with Lai on December 31, 2019, Lai instructed him to “inform the young people” about the primary election, stating that young people should pay more attention to election work because “this would help rally public support.” Chan further claimed that Lai spoke of the advantages of the primary election, as it could consolidate “yellow camp” votes and attract younger voters. If independent candidates lost in the primary, their votes could “ultimately flow to the old pan-democrats” in the Legislative Council election, thereby securing pan-democratic seats. However, during the defense’s questioning, Lai denied making such remarks, stating that he had not paid attention to or been involved in the primary election.

The prosecution cited a WhatsApp conversation between Lai and Democratic Party member Lee Wing-tat on December 15, 2019, showing that Lai provided Lee with the contact number of his protégé, Simon Lee:

Lai: “Brother Tat, Simon Lee is an old colleague of mine. He is the initiator of the primary election software. If there are any questions, he can come in person to demonstrate and teach the relevant people how to use it. Thanks. Jimmy.”

Lee: “Okay, I will talk to him. Thanks.”

Lai: “He can also assist with operations and setup. He is almost like my student—no matter how you trouble him, he will be enthusiastic to help. Don’t hesitate. Thanks.”

The prosecution asked whether Lai was already discussing the primary election with Lee Wing-tat at the time. Lai responded that he was unsure and suggested that Lee might have inquired about how to conduct the primary election. The prosecution then pointed out that the messages indicated Lai was providing assistance by connecting Lee with Simon Lee to handle the primary election voting software. Lai confirmed this.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang asked whether Simon Lee already had the software ready at the time. Lai responded that Lee Wing-tat had asked him about the best way to conduct the primary election and that Simon Lee was knowledgeable about online voting. However, Lai clarified that Simon Lee did not develop the software himself, as it was created in Europe.

Judge Lee further referenced a message from former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong, James Cunningham, dated November 25 of the same year, stating, “Goal now should be a path to getting inside the CE process.” Lai responded that this message referred to the Legislative Council election, not the primary election.

Lai recalled that Lee Wing-tat had informed him of plans for a primary election and had sought his advice on the best approach. Lai then thought of Simon Lee, who had suggested using online voting. Lai reiterated that Simon Lee did not develop the software but only helped select it.

Judge Susana D’Almada Remedios asked whether Lai had discussed the primary election with Simon Lee before sending the December 15 message. Lai said there was no need for a specific discussion because Simon Lee was already very attentive to democratic affairs.

Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang inquired who first brought up the primary election. Lai responded that he did not know but believed he had heard about it before Lee Wing-tat mentioned it, as vote coordination had already been a concern within the pan-democratic camp.

The Witness