14 Mar 2024法庭線#3171
黎智英案｜陳沛敏15日供詞整合 如何形容黎的作風？是否認同其編採政策？
The national security case against Jimmy Lai, originally scheduled for 80 days, began in December 2023 and has now completed more than 40 days of hearings. After the first accomplice witness, former Next Media chief executive Cheung Kim-hung, completed his testimony, the second accomplice witness, former Apple Daily associate publisher Chan Pui-man, also completed 15 days of testimony in early March, 13 of which involved questioning by the prosecution, including examination-in-chief and re-examination. Chan described Lai as relatively forceful and said he had the final say on editorial policy. Even when Lai sometimes offered suggestions politely, she regarded them as instructions.
She also disclosed that after being arrested in June 2021, she already felt that Apple Daily should cease operations because she could not ensure that her colleagues would not be arrested. She resigned after being released, but because of internal disorder at the company, her resignation had still not taken effect on the day Apple Daily ceased operations. She therefore took part in approving the printing of 1 million copies of the final issue of Apple Daily.
The Witness has compiled the details from recent days to help readers understand the key points of the testimony more easily.
原訂 80 日審期的黎智英國安案，由 2023 年 12 月開審至今，完成逾 40 日審訊。首名「從犯證人」前壹傳媒行政總裁張劍虹完成作供後，第二名「從犯證人」、前《蘋果》副社長陳沛敏，亦於 3 月初完成 15 日作供，當中 13 日由控方提問（主問連同覆問）。陳沛敏形容黎智英較強勢，在編採政策上「一錘定音」，即使黎有時客氣提建議，她都會視為指示。
她又透露，自己於 2021 年 6 月被捕後，已覺得《蘋果》應結束，因她無法確保同事不會被捕。她亦在獲釋後請辭，但當時公司內部混亂，至《蘋果》停運當日仍未生效，故有份批准最後一期《蘋果》刊印 100 萬份。
《法庭線》整合連日內容，讓讀者更易理解供詞重點。
14 Mar 2024法庭線#3173
黎智英案第45日審訊｜登報收據顯示客戶為「眾志」 李宇軒估計由周庭負責
The trial of Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and three companies associated with Apple Daily, who are charged with offences including “conspiracy to collude with a foreign power”, entered its 45th day at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, sitting as the High Court, on Thursday (14th). Li Yu-hsuan, the fourth accomplice witness, continued giving evidence for a second day.
The prosecution presented emails between Chan Tsz-wah and a staff member of the US newspaper The Washington Post, in which “Mark” appeared. Li said he did not know who this was at the time, but later learned that it was Mark Simon, whom he said he met through Chan. The prosecution also presented newspaper advertisements placed around the world, which Li confirmed, saying that he paid the advertising costs for some of the newspapers (see table below).
A receipt from The Asahi Shimbun listed the client as “Demosisto”. Li confirmed that this referred to the political party Demosisto, and said that a member had helped contact The Asahi Shimbun to place the advertisement. He was unsure of the person’s identity, saying, “But I think it was Agnes Chow; I think she was the only one who could speak Japanese.” The trial will continue on Friday (15th).
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英與《蘋果日報》3 間相關公司，被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」等罪，案件周四（14 日）在西九龍裁判法院（暫代高等法院）展開第 45 日審訊，第四位從犯證人李宇軒第二日作供。
控方展示陳梓華與美國《華盛頓郵報》職員的電郵，當中出現「Mark」，李宇軒指當時不知是誰，其後知道是 Mark Simon，指兩人經陳梓華介紹認識。控方另展示全球登報廣告，李確認，部分報章的登報費由他支付（見下表）。
當中《朝日新聞》收據顯示，客戶為「眾志」。李確認是政黨「香港眾志」，有成員幫忙聯絡《朝日新聞》登報，他不肯定該人身分，「但我估係周庭，我估得佢一個識講日文」。案件周五（15 日）續審。
14 Mar 2024法庭線#3181
首宗煽動上訴案被駁回 據悉譚得志就定罪申上訴至終院
Tam Tak-chi, the former vice-chairman of People Power, known as “Fast Beat”, was convicted of 11 offences, including uttering seditious words, over remarks including “all black cops’ families should die” and “Liberate Hong Kong; revolution of our times” made while operating a street booth in 2020. He was sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment. Tam appealed against both his convictions and sentence, but both appeals were dismissed by the Court of Appeal last Thursday (7th). It is understood that on Thursday (14th), Tam applied for a certificate to appeal against his convictions to the Court of Final Appeal. The Department of Justice told The Witness in response to an enquiry that it had received notice of the motion for the defendant’s application for a certificate to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
The case is the first appeal against a sedition conviction since 1997. One of the issues in dispute is whether the prosecution must prove an intention to incite violence. As the Stand News case involves the same dispute, Judge Kwok Wai-kin previously said he would rule on the Stand News case within one month after the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in the “Fast Beat case”.
人民力量前副主席「快必」譚得志，被指 2020 年擺街站時，發表「黑警死全家」、「光時」等言論，被裁定「發表煽動文字」等 11 罪成，判囚 40 個月。譚不服定罪及刑罰提上訴，上周四（7 日）均被上訴庭駁回。據悉，譚得志周四（14 日）就定罪申請上訴至終審法院證明書。律政司回覆《法庭線》查詢指，已收悉被告申請上訴至終院證明書的動議通知。
本案是 1997 年後首宗煽動罪上訴案，爭議點之一，是控方須否證煽暴意圖。由於「立場案」涉及相同爭議，法官郭偉健早前指，會在上訴庭就「快必案」頒判詞後一個月內，就「立場案」作出裁決。
13 Mar 2024光傳媒#3167
李宇軒作供第一天｜「對華政策跨國議會聯盟」 譴責政權對李宇軒施行酷刑 批審訊荒謬並具有政治動機
Media tycoon Jimmy Lai and three companies affiliated with Apple Daily are charged with offences including “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces”. The case entered its 44th day of trial today (13th), with the prosecution calling its fourth accomplice witness, Li Yu-hin, one of the “12 Hong Kongers” and a member of Hong Kong Story, to testify. The Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China produced a video of about four minutes in which six political figures from different countries and Hong Kong exiles strongly criticised the trial as absurd and politically motivated.
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英與《蘋果日報》三間相關公司，被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」等罪，案件今（13 日）展開第44日審訊。控方傳召第四名從犯證人、「12 港人」之一、「香港故事」成員李宇軒作供。「對華政策跨國議會聯盟」拍攝了一段約4分鐘短片，6名來自不同國家的政界人士和流亡港人，狠批審訊荒謬並具有政治動機。
13 Mar 2024法庭線#3168
黎智英案第44日審訊｜李宇軒：登報欲將香港示威帶到國際舞台 陳梓華曾問「Uncle」墊支
Media tycoon Jimmy Lai and three companies linked to Apple Daily are charged with offences including conspiracy to collude with a foreign country or external forces. The case entered its 44th day of trial on Wednesday (13th) at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, sitting as the High Court, with the fourth accomplice witness, Li Yu-hin, giving evidence on his first day in the witness box.
Li testified that he met Chan Tsz-wah, another defendant who has pleaded guilty in the same case, via Telegram in June 2019. Before the G20 summit, they discussed a plan to place newspaper advertisements, hoping to bring Hong Kong’s “highly eye-catching scenes of protest” and the momentum they had generated to the international stage and attract international attention. Li further said that after the crowdfunding campaign ended, the funds could not be used immediately because transfers took time, so someone was needed to front the advertising costs. Chan then said he “could help think of a way”, and that he had “asked some uncles” who could make HK$5 million available.
The prosecution presented the public letter for the “Stand with Hong Kong at G20” global newspaper advertising campaign and an income-and-expenditure list. They showed that the crowdfunding raised about HK$6.73 million and that advertisements were placed in 17 media companies across 13 countries, including The Guardian in the United Kingdom and The Washington Post in the United States. About HK$5.96 million was spent, along with approximately HK$60,000 on online advertising. The trial will continue on Thursday (14th).
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英與《蘋果日報》3 間相關公司，被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」等罪，案件周三（13 日）在西九龍裁判法院（暫代高等法院）展開第 44 日審訊，第四位從犯證人李宇軒首日作供。
李宇軒供稱，2019 年 6 月經 TG 認識同案另一認罪被告陳梓華，兩人於「G20 峰會」前夕商討登報計劃，希望將香港「引人注目的示威場面」及所引起的動力，帶到國際舞台，引起國際關注。李續指，眾籌計劃結束後，因轉帳需時未能立即動用款項，需要有人墊支廣告費，陳遂稱「可以幫手諗計」，「問過啲 uncle」可動用 500 萬港元。
控方庭上展示「Stand with Hong Kong at G20」全球登報的公開信及收支列表，顯示眾籌收入約 673 萬元，分別在 13 個國家、17 間傳媒公司，包括英國 《衛報》、美國《華盛頓郵報》等登報，花費約 596 萬元，另有約 6 萬元網上廣告費。案件周四（14 日）續審。
12 Mar 2024法庭線#3162
黎智英案第43日審訊｜楊清奇：《蘋果》編採「鳥籠自主」 李宇軒周三作供
The trial of Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai and three companies associated with Apple Daily, who are charged with “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces” and other offences, entered its 43rd day at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, sitting as the High Court, on Tuesday (12th). Yeung Ching-kei, the third accomplice witness and former chief editor of Apple Daily, confirmed under questioning by the defence that the newspaper’s criticism in its articles was intended to point out improper government administration and thereby prompt the government to improve its policies.
Yeung also described Apple Daily’s editorial operations as “autonomy within a cage”. He said Lai set the newspaper’s basic position, likening this to creating a “cage”: “Editorial staff have a certain degree of freedom and a certain degree of editorial autonomy within the ‘cage’, but they cannot go beyond this framework.” Yeung completed his testimony and nodded towards the public gallery before leaving. The prosecution will call Li Yu-hsuan, the fourth accomplice witness and one of the “12 Hong Kong fugitives”, to testify on Wednesday (13th).
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英與《蘋果日報》3 間相關公司，被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」等罪，案件周二（12 日）在西九龍裁判法院（暫代高等法院）展開第 43 日審訊，第三位從犯證人、前《蘋果》主筆楊清奇在辯方盤問下確認，《蘋果》文章作出批評，是為了指出政府施政不當，從而令政府改善政策。
楊另形容，《蘋果》編採是「鳥籠自主」，黎智英設定《蘋果》基本立場，猶如制定「鳥籠」，「採編人員喺『鳥籠』係有一定自由嘅、有一定採編自主權，但唔可以超過呢個框架。」楊完成作供，離席前向旁聽席點頭。控方周三（13 日）將傳召第四名從犯證人、「12 港人」之一李宇軒作供。
11 Mar 2024法庭線#3149
黎智英案第42日審訊｜楊清奇稱《蘋果》常籲上街 「我覺得唔係好嘅標題」
Next Digital founder Lai Chee-ying and three companies linked to Apple Daily are charged with offences including “conspiracy to collude with a foreign country or with external elements”. The case entered its 42nd day of trial at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, temporarily acting as the High Court, on Monday (11th), with Yeung Ching-ki, the third accomplice witness and former chief writer of Apple Daily, giving evidence for the sixth day.
Yeung testified that Apple Daily’s radical stance during the anti-extradition law amendment movement was “well known”. He also said that Lai Chee-ying’s columns often called on people to take to the streets, while reports also frequently used the words “take to the streets”: “I don’t think that’s a good headline.” Yeung said Apple Daily was relatively tolerant and supportive of the position that peaceful and more militant protesters should not be distinguished, advocating “the three noes”: no condemnation, no disassociation and no informing on others. The prosecution completed its examination-in-chief, and the defence will begin cross-examination on Tuesday (12th).
The case is being heard by High Court-designated National Security Law judges Esther Toh, Susana Maria D'Almada Remedios and Wilson Chan. The prosecution is represented by Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions Tianxing Zhou, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Cheung Cheuk-kan and Senior Public Prosecutor Chan Wing-sam. Lai Chee-ying is represented by Senior Counsel Robert Yiu Hung Pang, barrister Steven Kwan and New Zealand King’s Counsel Marc Corlett, who is qualified to practise in Hong Kong.
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英與《蘋果日報》3 間相關公司，被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」等罪，案件周一（11 日）在西九龍裁判法院（暫代高等法院）展開第 42 日審訊，第三位從犯證人、前《蘋果》主筆楊清奇第六日作供。
楊供稱，反修例運動期間，《蘋果》立場激進是「眾所周知」，又指黎智英專欄文章經常呼籲上街，報道亦經常有「上街」字眼，「我覺得唔係好嘅標題囉」。楊又指，《蘋果》對「和勇不分」比較寬容及支持，主張「三不」，即不譴責、不割蓆、不篤灰。控方完成主問，周二（12 日）由辯方開始盤問。
案件由高院《國安法》指定法官杜麗冰、李素蘭及李運騰審理。控方由副刑事檢控專員周天行、助理刑事檢控專員張卓勤、高級檢控官陳穎琛代表；黎智英由資深大律師彭耀鴻、大律師關文渭及有香港執業資格的新西蘭御用大律師 Marc Corlett 代表。
11 Mar 2024法庭線#3155
快必煽動案上訴失敗 陳文敏：判詞值得商榷 港毋須參考普通法發展說不通
Tam Tak-chi’s appeal in his sedition case was dismissed. The Court of Appeal ruled that, under the common law, an intention to incite violence is not an essential element for conviction, and said Hong Kong’s offence of having a seditious intention is a “statutory offence” established in accordance with the territory’s special circumstances. It therefore held that developments in other common-law jurisdictions and Privy Council judgments do not apply to Hong Kong.
Johannes Chan Man-mun, an adjunct professor at the University of Hong Kong’s Faculty of Law, said in an interview that the Court of Appeal’s judgment was “open to question”, as it had not clearly explained why it rejected the Privy Council’s view or how Hong Kong was special. He said law reform commissions in at least five countries had studied the issue and found that sedition offences had historically been prone to abuse and used to suppress dissent, asking: “What reason do we have to believe that this will not happen in Hong Kong?”
Chan disagreed with the judgment’s view that the legislation sets out circumstances that do not constitute seditious intention and establishes a clear boundary. He said freedom of expression should not be confined to serious discussion of legal and policy issues, noting that everyday speech could also involve satire of current affairs or an outlet for dissatisfaction with social conditions, and asking: “Should all such speech be subject to restrictions?”
He said that if the aim was to address seditious acts not involving violence, targeted legislation could be enacted, such as legislation dealing with the publication of false information affecting the stock market, rather than using broadly defined sedition provisions to cover them.
譚得志煽動案上訴被駁回，上訴庭裁定普通法下煽暴意圖，並非定罪必要元素，並指本港煽動意圖罪屬「成文法」，且是根據本港特殊情況而定，故其他普通法地區發展及英國樞密院判詞不適用於本港。
港大法律學院客席教授陳文敏受訪時指，上訴庭判詞「值得商榷」，未能清楚解釋為何不採納樞密院的看法，以及香港的特殊性。他指，目前至少 5 國的法改會經研究，指出煽動罪在歷史上容易被濫用、用作打壓異己，「我們有什麼理由去相信香港不會出現這種情況呢？」
對於判詞指條文已列出不屬煽動意圖的情況， 訂出清晰界線，陳不認同，指言論自由不應僅限於嚴肅討論法律、政策問題，指日常生活亦有諷刺時弊、對社會狀況不滿的宣洩性言論，反問「是否這些言論都要受限制？」
他認為，若要針對不涉及暴力的煽動行為，可另訂針對性法例處理，例如發布虛假消息影響股票市場，而非以定義過寬的煽動條文涵蓋。
8 Mar 2024法庭線#3122
黎智英案第41日審訊｜楊清奇：李柱銘專欄強調法治 胡志偉文章支持制裁林鄭
The trial of Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai and three companies linked to Apple Daily, who are charged with offences including “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces”, entered its 41st day on Friday (8th) at the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Courts, temporarily serving as the High Court. Yang Ching-ki, the third accomplice witness and a former chief editor of Apple Daily, gave evidence for the fifth day.
The prosecution continued questioning Yang about the perspectives of writers on the Forum page. Yang confirmed that articles by Democratic Party founding chairman Martin Lee placed greater emphasis on the rule of law, and that Lee had also expressed concerns about the National Security Law. Former Democratic Party chairman Wu Chi-wai, meanwhile, supported the protests and sanctions against former Chief Executive Carrie Lam. Yang also said Forum page articles were translated into English without the authors’ consent being required, and the authors would not receive additional fees. The trial will resume next Monday (11th).
壹傳媒創辦人黎智英與《蘋果日報》3 間相關公司，被控「串謀勾結外國勢力」等罪，案件周五（8 日）在西九龍裁判法院（暫代高等法院）展開第 41 日審訊，第三位從犯證人、前《蘋果》主筆楊清奇第五日作供。
控方續圍繞論壇版寫手角度提問，楊確認民主黨創黨主席李柱銘的文章較強調法治，亦曾表示對《國安法》擔心；民主黨前主席胡志偉則支持抗爭及制裁前特首林鄭月娥。另外，楊稱論壇版文章被翻譯成英文，毋須徵詢作者同意，作者亦不會獲得額外稿費。案件下周一（11 日）續審。
7 Mar 2024法庭線#3116
首宗煽動案上訴｜譚得志上訴被駁回 上訴庭： 普通法下煽暴意圖 非煽動罪必要元素
Tam Tak-chi, known as “Fast Beat”, former vice-chairman of People Power, was convicted of 11 charges including publishing seditious words over remarks including “May the black cops’ whole families die” and “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times” made while he was operating a street booth in 2020. He was sentenced to 40 months’ imprisonment. Tam appealed against both his convictions and sentence, but the Court of Appeal dismissed both appeals on Thursday (the 7th).
The judgment said the UK Privy Council case cited by the appellant contained only obiter remarks. Seditious intent must be interpreted according to the specific legal framework and social circumstances, and intent to incite violence under common law is not an essential element of the statutory offence of sedition.
The judgment also said the offence of sedition must have sufficient flexibility to address national security threats at the time. The wording concerning seditious intent therefore had to be broad enough to cover different periods and circumstances. It ultimately ruled that the sedition charges had struck a balance between the public interest and freedom of expression, and that it did not appear that anyone, including Tam Tak-chi, a social activist who strongly criticised the government, would bear an unacceptable and onerous burden because of the restrictions imposed on seditious speech.
人民力量前副主席「快必」譚得志，被指 2020 年擺街站時，發表「黑警死全家」、「光時」等言論，被裁定「發表煽動文字」等 11 罪成，判囚 40 個月。譚不服定罪及刑罰提上訴，周四（7 日）均被上訴庭駁回。
判詞指，上訴方所引述的英國樞密院案例，只是附帶意見，煽動意圖必須依據其特定的法律框架及社會狀況作詮釋，裁定普通法下的煽暴意圖，並非法定煽動罪的必要元素。
判詞又指，煽動罪須有足夠靈活性，以應對當下的國安威脅，故煽動意圖的用詞必須足夠寬廣，以涵蓋不同時間、不同境況，最終裁定煽動控罪，在社會利益和言論自由之間已取得平衡，「亦不見得任何人，包括譚得志這位強烈批評政府的社運人物，會因為煽動言論被施加的限制，負上不可接受的嚴苛負擔」。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
