Jimmy Lai, founder of Next Digital, is facing charges of “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces.” His case resumed Thursday (28th) at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts (designated as the High Court) for its 156th day of trial, with both the prosecution and defense having completed their closing arguments.

The defense had earlier asked the court to take judicial notice of matters such as China’s imposition of sanctions and U.S.-Taiwan relations, claiming these were facts “known to all.” Judge Esther Toh rejected the request, ruling that such matters were irrelevant to the case and unsuitable for judicial notice. She further stated that whether Apple Daily carried influence or resonated with the public was part of the defense’s argument, not evidence. When the defense pressed about the date of the ruling, Toh responded, “We will inform the parties in good time.”

Lai appeared in court wearing glasses, a white shirt, and an off-white blazer. He smiled, placed his hand lightly on his chest, and put on earphones. When supporters in the public gallery greeted him, he nodded and clasped his hands in return. At one moment, Lai opened his mouth wide in surprise before breaking into a smile upon seeing a friend. As the hearing adjourned, he waved toward the gallery and later spoke with his lawyers for several minutes through the glass partition.

Judge Says Judicial Notice Inappropriate on Whether China Imposed Sanctions

Judge Esther Toh referenced matters raised by the defense, which included whether China had imposed sanctions on any individuals; whether Argentine footballer Lionel Messi had been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom; whether the United States maintained solid informal relations with the Taiwanese government; whether the U.S. had sold military equipment to Taiwan; and whether the U.S., despite China’s opposition, had provided such equipment to Taiwan — questioning whether these were indeed “matters of common knowledge.”

The court ruled that these issues were irrelevant to the case and therefore unsuitable for judicial notice.

Judge: Whether Apple Daily Had Influence Is Argument, Not Evidence

Judge Toh also cited parts of the defense’s submissions, noting that the court would assess whether there was evidence to support them, or whether they should instead be regarded as argument or commentary.

She added that the defense’s references to phrases such as “voice of the people” and claims about whether Apple Daily had influence or resonated with the public would be treated as part of the defense’s argument. Aside from acknowledging that Apple Daily had a large readership, the court had no other relevant evidence.

As for whether the United Nations General Assembly had long recommended sanctions, or whether U.S. arms sales to Taiwan were matters of common knowledge, Toh stated that the court had no evidence and would not take judicial notice.

The defense also referred to the duties of former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong James Cunningham, citing Jowitt’s Dictionary of English Law to explain the role of a consul. Judge Toh responded that there was no evidence regarding Cunningham’s actual work and responsibilities while serving in Hong Kong, and therefore the court would treat this reference as part of the defense’s argument.

Judges Focus on Defense Claim That Lai Always Supported Social Movements

Judge Alex Lee raised questions regarding the defense’s submission that “since the 1990s, Jimmy Lai has been committed to publishing critical journalism and supporting social movements; Apple Daily was not founded in 2014 or 2019, and Lai’s friendships did not begin only recently.” Lee asked whether this was Lai’s testimony or simply the defense’s summary of all the evidence presented in court. The defense replied that the passage was not directly related to witness testimony.

Lee then referred to the prosecution’s accomplice witness, former Next Digital CEO Cheung Kim-hung, who had testified that Apple Daily was previously perceived by the public as more of a “tabloid,” and that it was only around the 2014 Occupy Central movement that Lai began urging the public to fight for democracy and take to the streets. The defense countered that Lai had consistently supported social movements, citing Apple Daily’s coverage of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown as evidence.

In closing, the defense asked, “I know this is a difficult question, but may I dare ask — when can we expect a judgment date?” Judge Esther Toh replied, “We will inform the parties in good time.”