Hong Kong media tycoon Jimmy Lai and three Apple Daily–related companies are standing trial for conspiring to collude with foreign forces under the National Security Law. On Thursday, the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court (sitting as the High Court) entered its 156th day of hearings, with both prosecution and defense having completed their closing arguments.

The defense submitted a seven-page written argument urging the court to take “judicial notice” of certain “notorious facts,” including that Apple Daily’s stance resonated with a majority of Hongkongers. Judge Esther Toh dismissed the request, stating there was no evidence to prove such a claim, and emphasized that assertions like Lionel Messi receiving the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom, the United States supplying weapons to Taiwan despite Chinese opposition, or the UN Security Council’s long history of sanctions were either irrelevant or unsuitable for judicial notice.

The defense also argued that Lai stepped in as Next Digital’s executive chairman in May 2020 because he anticipated the imminent implementation of the National Security Law and felt compelled to personally take responsibility for Apple Daily, rather than leaving staff to face the risks alone. The court stressed that such points were submissions, not evidence.

The judges further questioned the defense’s reference to Lai’s protégé Simon Lee (also known as Lee Siu-man), who allegedly attended “lunchbox meetings” and drafted summaries. Justice Esther noted no witness testimony corroborated his presence, and Justice Andrew Chan described the claim as hearsay.

The defense argued that Jimmy Lai’s “protégé,” Simon Lee (also known as Lee Siu-man), had attended lunchbox meetings and even drafted meeting summaries, citing Slack records as support. However, Judge Susana Maria D’Almada Remedios criticized the claim as highly misleading to the court, noting that no witness testimony had ever mentioned Simon Lee being involved in the meetings. Judge Esther Toh stated the claim amounted only to hearsay evidence, while Judge Alex Lee also emphasized that no witness had testified that Simon Lee had attended the meetings.

The defense further highlighted Lai’s decades of activism, from the 1990s publication of opposition magazine Next to his pro-democracy advocacy. But the court again stressed such references were submissions, not admissible as judicially noticed facts.

With evidence and arguments now closed, Justice Esther Toh stated that proceedings had reached a pause. The three-judge panel will deliberate before notifying the parties when a verdict can be expected.