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

ZA Bank Brings Nasdaq Data To Hong Kong, Expanding US Stock Access And Investor Education

ZA Bank and Nasdaq have announced a collaboration aimed at enhancing digital wealth management in Hong Kong and interna... Read more

Hong Kong To Study One‑Stop Infrastructure For Equities, Bonds And Digital Assets

The Hong Kong Monetary Authority’s (HKMA) CMU OmniClear and the Hong Kong Exchange (HKEX) are set to begin a study on... Read more

Hong Kong To Issue First Stablecoin Licenses In March, Expand Crypto Regulation

Hong Kong will issue its first licenses for fiat-referenced stablecoin issuers in March and introduce new legislation l... Read more

MSIG Joins US$6B IFC Credit Insurance Facility To Boost Emerging Market Lending

MSIG USA and Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance (MSI Japan), together referred to as MSIG, have joined a new insurance-ba... Read more

Why The $2 Trillion Stablecoin Prediction Is Too Low

McKinsey estimates the stablecoin market will hit $2 trillion by 2028. But according to Sam Lin, COO of dtcpay, even th... Read more

RedotPay Eyes US IPO With Potential US$1 Billion Raise

RedotPay is reportedly exploring an IPO in the US that could raise more than US$1 billion, according to people famili... Read more