In the case of “Stand News” being accused of “conspiracy to publish seditious publications,” the prosecution and defense completed their closing arguments at the end of June 2023. The ruling was originally scheduled for October of the same year, but was later changed to November. In response to the defense requesting the court to consider an earlier judgment of the British Privy Council on the Sedition Ordinance and Tan Tak-chi’s sedition appeal, the case was adjourned to April 29.
The latest display on the Judiciary’s website shows that the case has been adjourned again to 2:30 pm on August 30, which is expected to take 180 minutes. It is understood that the prosecution and defense received notice from the court that Judge Guo Weijian needs more time to consider the ruling.
“Stand News” was charged with “conspiracy to publish seditious publications”. This was the first trial of a media accused of sedition after 1997. The trial lasted for 57 days from October 2022 to the latest ruling. Spanning nearly 2 years.
The case is adjourned pending the outcome of Kuaibi’s appeal
The case completed its closing arguments at the end of June 2023. It was originally scheduled to be postponed to October 4 of the same year, but later changed to November 15. In response to the British Privy Council’s latest ruling that the intention to incite violence or disorder is an “implied necessary condition” for the conviction of incitement, the prosecution and defense submitted written submissions and made further submissions.
At the same time, in Tan Dezhi’s incitement appeal case, Tan Yifang also argued that the crime of incitement required proof of the element of incitement. Judge Guo Weijian adjourned the “Standard” case to make a ruling within 30 days of the outcome of the Tan Dezhi case.
Prosecution: Hong Kong has a “special social situation”
Defense: Fundamental rights must be protected
The prosecution and defense made further submissions on the British Privy Council case in November last year. The prosecution pointed out that the Privy Council judgment mentioned that the intention to incite violence must be proved for the crime of incitement, which was only the judge’s “incidental opinion”. However, the provisions for sedition in Trinidad and Hong Kong are different. In addition, the anti-amendment incident broke out in Hong Kong in 2019. “Special social situation”, Trinidad’s interpretation of incitement cannot be completely applied to Hong Kong.
The defense pointed out that the crime of incitement in Hong Kong and Trinidad was a crime under common law, and “we all have the same origin.” The content of the judgment on the intention to incite violence was a conclusion based on the constitutional dispute in the case, so the court should adopt it. The defense also stated that even if Hong Kong’s situation is special, as the prosecution pointed out, basic rights must still be protected. “One sentence is freedom of speech.”
Tan Dezhi’s appeal was rejected
Court of Appeal: Intent to incite violence is not a necessary element of the crime of incitement
The Court of Appeal delivered its judgment in the Tan Dezhi case on March 7, 2024, rejecting Tan’s appeal against conviction and sentence. The judgment pointed out that the British Privy Council case quoted by the appeal was only an incidental opinion, and the intention to incite must be interpreted in accordance with its specific legal framework and social conditions. It ruled that the intention to incite violence under common law is not a necessary element of the statutory crime of incitement.
The verdict also pointed out that the crime of incitement must be flexible enough to deal with current national security threats, so the wording of inciting intent must be broad enough to cover different times and situations. The final ruling on the charge of incitement was between social interests and freedom of speech. A balance has been struck, and “it is unlikely that anyone, including Tam Tak-chi, a social activist who is a strong critic of the government, will bear an unacceptably stringent burden due to the restrictions imposed on incendiary speech.”
Tam Tak-chi has applied for a certificate of appeal to the Court of Final Appeal against his conviction. The Department of Justice responded to an inquiry by Court Line and stated that it had received a notice of motion from the defendant to apply for a certificate of appeal to the Court of Final Appeal.
Case number: DCCC265/2022
The Witness Facebook page
The Witness Instagram Page
Court Witness The Witness YouTube Channel
Tags: Stands alleged sedition case originally scheduled April postponed time August
