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

Five Years In: Lessons From Asias Digital Bank Revolution | David Becker, MD APAC, Mambu

Digital banking in Asia was supposed to change the world. Five years later, did it live up to the hype? In this in-dept... Read more

19th Asian Financial Forum To Spotlight Finance And Global Opportunities

The 19th Asian Financial Forum (AFF), co-organised by the Hong Kong SAR government and the Hong Kong Trade Development ... Read more

HK Banks Launch Money Safe Service To Protect Deposits

The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and the Hong Kong Association of Banks (HKAB) announced on 30 December that all... Read more

HashKey Lists On Hong Kong Exchange

HashKey listed on the Main Board of The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited, becoming the first digital asset company t... Read more

North Korea Linked To Over Half Of 2025 Crypto Heist Losses

TRM has published new research showing that North Korea-linked actors were responsible for more than half of the US$2.7... Read more

South Korea Forms Task Force After Coupang Data Breach

The South Korean government announced on Thursday (19 December) that it will establish an interagency task force to add... Read more