Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, Apple Daily Ltd, Apple Daily Printing Ltd, and Apple Daily Internet Ltd were charged with conspiracy to collude with external forces to endanger national security and conspiracy to publish seditious publications. The three designated judges delivered a unanimous guilty verdict in the case under the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL).

The trial lasted a total of 156 days in open court, during which Lai himself testified for as many as 52 days. Following the closing statements from Aug 18 to 28, the designated judges spent nearly four months carefully assessing a vast amount of evidence with the law in mind and the comprehensive arguments presented by all parties before reaching a guilty verdict. This process precisely reflects the fact that the court conducted the trial and delivered the judgment based on the principles of openness, fairness, and impartiality, embodying the spirit of the rule of law.

Article 85 of the Basic Law stipulates that the courts of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall exercise judicial power independently, free from any interference. In all criminal trials, the courts strictly adhere to the law and evidence, and the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt before a defendant can be convicted. This standard was equally applied in the case of Lai. While the court found the prosecution witnesses to be honest and reliable after an extensive cross-examination, the press summary of the judgment clearly states that the court found Lai’s evidence to be contradictory and inconsistent, and that he was evasive and unreliable in many instances. The court rejected his evidence.

As a member of the Legislative Council who participated in the full deliberation on the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, I affirm that the imperative to safeguard national security and to respect and protect human rights are fully compatible

Hong Kong residents enjoy freedom of the press and speech as protected by the Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance. In fact, the court made it clear that Lai was not on trial for his political views or beliefs, and that it would only consider the law and evidence to determine if the prosecution had proved the charges against the defendants beyond reasonable doubt. It was evident that Lai’s case has absolutely nothing to do with press freedom.

Both the NSL and the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance explicitly stipulate that safeguarding national security must respect and protect human rights. They also ensure that the rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents under the Basic Law, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as applied to the HKSAR — including freedom of the press, speech, and publication — are protected in accordance with the law.

Safeguarding national sovereignty, security, and development interests is the supreme principle of the “one country, two systems” policy. As a member of the Legislative Council who participated in the full deliberation on the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, I affirm that the imperative to safeguard national security and to respect and protect human rights are fully compatible. I have also witnessed the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the HKSAR government diligently fulfilling their duties and responsibilities since the implementation of the NSL, striving to prevent, suppress, and punish acts and activities endangering national security. Essentially, security is the prerequisite for development and the cornerstone of Hong Kong’s long-term prosperity and stability.

The author is a member of the Legislative Council, representing the Election Committee constituency, and chairperson of LegCo’s Panel on Security.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.