Subversion Suspects Denied Answer On Jury Trial Query

"); jQuery("#212 h3").html("

Related News Programmes

"); });

2021-05-31 HKT 18:56

Share this story

facebook

  • Chief Magistrate Victor So said he had no authority to instruct prosecutors to answer questions from defence lawyers on whether 47 pro-democracy figures charged with subversion would receive a jury trial. File photo: RTHK

    Chief Magistrate Victor So said he had no authority to instruct prosecutors to answer questions from defence lawyers on whether 47 pro-democracy figures charged with subversion would receive a jury trial. File photo: RTHK

Forty-seven people accused of national security crimes related to last year’s pan-democratic primaries appeared in court on Monday, with the counsel for several defendants questioning whether they would receive a jury trial. However, they did not receive any answer.

The lawyer – representing Leung Kwok-hung, Jimmy Sham and Lester Shum – also asked Chief Magistrate Victor So during a hearing at West Kowloon Magistracy whether the trial would be open to the public, and if prosecutors intend to paint the defendants as masterminds or active participants of the alleged conspiracy to commit subversion.

He said the answers would determine whether they plead guilty or not.

Under Article 22 of the national security law, people deemed to be 'principal offenders' or those who commit an offence of a grave nature face between 10 years to life in prison; those found to have ‘actively participated’ in a subversion plot can get jail terms ranging from three to 10 years; while ‘other participants’ get a maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment.

In response, the magistrate said he had no authority to instruct the prosecution to seek clarification on these matters from the Secretary for Justice.

These questions come days after a High Court judge decided in a separate national security case that the trial for defendant Tong Ying-kit would be held without a jury.

The judge had ruled that jury trials are not a constitutional right.

Meanwhile, So also rejected a separate request from other defence lawyers for more time to provide legal advice to their clients.

They had cited difficulties in meeting some defendants who have been kept in custody since their arrest in late February.

Again, So said he had no authority to make instructions to the prosecution.

All 47 defendants are due to appear before the court again on July 8 before their case is transferred to the High Court.

Eleven of them were granted bail, while the rest were remanded in custody. Bail applications for ten defendants will be heard over the next two days.

RECENT NEWS

StartmeupHK Festival And Hong Kong Fintech Week 2025 Merge For 10th Anniversary Milestone

Invest Hong Kong (InvestHK) announced on 10 March 2025 that both of its flagship events, Hong Kong Fintech Week 2025 an... Read more

Ant AI-Powered Health Insurance Processes 7.25M Claims In 2024, 55%YoY Increase

In 2024, Ant Insurance, the online insurance brokerage platform of Ant Group, processed 7.25 million health claims, mar... Read more

Ping An Talent Uses AI For Job Matching, But Can Technology Make Recruitment Fairer?

Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd. has launched its 2025 Spring Campus Recruitment, offering over 2,000 p... Read more

HKEX Partners With CMU OmniClear To Boost Post-Trade Securities Infrastructure

Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited (HKEX) announced on 4 March 2025 that it signed a Memorandum of Understanding ... Read more

PAObank Secures Insurance Agency Licence, Partners With Ping An And FWD Hong Kong

PAO Bank Limited (PAObank) has received its Insurance Agency Licence from the Insurance Authority and signed strategic ... Read more

IFAST Launches Self-Service Accounts For Hong Kong Family Offices

Fintech solutions provider iFAST HK launches self-service accounts in Hong Kong, catering to the growing demand for ind... Read more