A prosecution witness testifying at media mogul Jimmy Lai’s national security trial has said he spent 65 hours in meetings with police officers without giving official statements following his arrest under the national security law.
Excluding meetings where police took written and videotaped statements, paralegal Chan Tsz-wah spent 65 hours talking to officers about his “physical and emotional state” and life in detention, a panel of three handpicked national security judges heard on Monday.
Chan, who stands accused of conspiring with Lai and others to collude with foreign forces but has pleaded guilty, was testifying against the tycoon on the 68th day of the national security trial.
Chan also backtracked on denying that he helped arrange activist and co-defendant Andy Li’s escape bid – a remark he made under police caution, according to a transcript of a police interview following Chan’s first arrest in October 2020. It was presented to the court by Lai’s lawyer Marc Corlett.
Lai faces two counts of conspiring to collude with foreign forces and one count of conspiring to publish “seditious” materials. He has pleaded not guilty to all three charges and could spend the rest of his life in prison if convicted.
65 hours discussing ’emotions’
Corlett on Monday presented to the court a record of Chan’s meetings with the police following his arrest in February 15, 2021 under the Beijing-imposed national security law. Chan confirmed that he enquired about becoming a prosecution witness and asked how he could assist with the police investigation at the first police meeting on March 31.
He would have several more meetings in the weeks leading up to April 28, when he made his first official statement in a videotaped interview after deciding to become a prosecution witness.
In response to Judge Alex Lee, who asked what the meetings were about, Chan said he mostly spoke about his “emotions.” Asked if he was questioned about any other topics in the combined 18 hours that he met with police officers in that timeframe, Chan said he had “no recollection.”
Chan told Corlett that he had no memory of police officers at the meetings taking notes, save for three meetings in May 2021 where Chan made official statements, and a fourth on November 10, 2022. He also conducted several videotaped interviews.
After those meetings where he made statements, the police visited him 65 times, for a duration of about 65 hours, though not to discuss his statements, Chan told Judge Lee.
Asked if he recalled the police officers taking notes on those 65 occasions, Chan said he did not. The paralegal also told the court that he only spoke to police officers about his physical condition, his life and grievances in detention, and how he suffered from emotional breakdowns.
“So, [the 65 meetings] were not for the purpose of statement-taking, and not for the purpose of ?” asked Lee. Chan said he agreed, and added that he did not recall the police conducting any “memory refreshing exercises.”
Lee then asked, “What would you say was the purpose of those meetings?” – to which Chan said he thought it was standard procedure to check in on him.
Chan also told the court that not all of his friends and family could visit him, as they had to make applications, adding that he “could not see the sun” from the detention centre.
Activist’s escape
Corlett on Monday also showed the court a transcript of a police interview following Chan’s October 2020 arrest, in which the paralegal said he “personally did not spend a single penny, let alone say anything to help [Li] leave Hong Kong.”
Asked if he had arranged a boat for Li’s escape after the activist was granted bail, Chan said he did introduce Li to someone who would help.
Chan also said he would help Li check for a safehouse in the meantime, and discussed anti-tracking strategies. He told the court he contacted someone by the name of “Kyle” to arrange a safehouse, and passed instructions to Li to meet with him. But, when asked if Li eventually stayed in a safehouse arranged by Kyle, he said he could not remember.
Chan also said someone named Chan Sai-tak contacted him via the Telegram messaging app, saying he would be able to provide financial support and arrange a safehouse and transportation for Li.
Police statements
Cross-referencing Chan’s court testimony with transcripts of his meetings with the police, Corlett on Monday also pointed out parts of the paralegal’s testimony that were not mentioned in his police statements.
Corlett cited more than a dozen points about Chan’s meetings with Lai that the witness mentioned in his testimony but not to the police in 2021, including how Jimmy Lai was not unsupportive of violent protesters, but simply had to cater to the demands of Western governments to sustain international support.
Corlett also mentioned how Chan had expressed concerns about the national security law, and how he wanted to “back down” and stop pushing for sanctions. Chan confirmed he had never mentioned that matter to the police.
Various matters involving the activist group Stand With Hong Kong’s international lobbying efforts were also among matters that Chan did not tell the police, the court heard.
Corlett continued, asking if Chan had mentioned pushing for trade embargoes to apply pressure to the Hong Kong authorities as Judge Esther Toh noted a line in Chan’s statement mentioning “economic blockades.”
“That’s the problem with throwing that at us because we haven’t seen [Chan’s statements]. It’s so hard for us to face these questions because its a very long paragraph, and it’s not very fair for the witness,” Toh said. Corlett then obliged with the judges’ order to allow Chan to read the transcript before answering.
Chan will review whether he had mentioned those issues in the recorded interviews at the next hearing on Friday.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
