The trial of Jimmy Lai resumed on November 20, 2024, with Lai appearing in court to testify. Simultaneously, a "foreign fake legal team" has been actively disseminating propaganda abroad, seemingly aimed at undermining Hong Kong's judicial process.
Why Call Them a "Fake Legal Team"?
This purported international legal team is led by British barrister Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC, who has collaborated with Lai's son, Sebastien Lai, for over two years. Gallagher claims to represent Jimmy Lai on the international stage and was scheduled to hold a press conference on Nov 20 at the National Press Club in Washington, where she was expected to once again disparage Hong Kong.
However, Lai's only legitimate legal representatives are from the Hong Kong-based law firm Robertsons. On January 13, 2023, Robertsons issued a statement clarifying that they are Lai’s sole legal team for all Hong Kong-related criminal cases and litigation. Lai has not authorized any other group to represent him in these matters, nor does he have any affiliation with an international legal team.
This situation presents two logical possibilities: either Lai and his legal team are being dishonest, and Gallagher’s group genuinely represents him while conducting political activities abroad to disrupt the trial; or Gallagher’s team operates independently, without Lai’s authorization or funding—hence the term "foreign fake legal team."
Based on available evidence, Robertsons' statement suggests that Gallagher’s team falsely claims to represent Lai. Gallagher, a human rights lawyer associated with Doughty Street Chambers, is known for her anti-China stance. Notably, Baroness Helena Kennedy, a senior figure at the firm and a Labour peer, has been sanctioned by China since 2021 due to her involvement in anti-China activities and her role as co-chair of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC).
Misleading International Narratives
For over two years, this "foreign fake legal team" has propagated unfounded allegations internationally, claiming Lai faces inhumane treatment in prison. Their objective is to pressure foreign governments to demand Lai’s immediate release without trial.
In January, at the start of Lai’s trial, the team submitted an urgent appeal to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, alleging that key witness Andy Li had been tortured while detained on the Mainland. These claims were later disproven in court. Similarly, in September, they alleged Lai was held in solitary confinement without proper medical care for his diabetes and was denied religious rites. On September 27, Robertsons refuted these claims, clarifying that Lai receives adequate medical treatment and has access to religious services although he did not make relevant requests. Despite these clarifications, false narratives continue to circulate internationally, distorting perceptions of Hong Kong's judicial system.
Potential Legal Violations in the UK
Gallagher and her associates' misrepresentation may constitute a breach of the UK Fraud Act 2006. Under Section 2, fraud by false representation includes dishonestly making false statements for personal gain or causing others to suffer loss. By falsely claiming to represent Lai and disseminating unverified accusations, they may have violated this law. The UK government should investigate these actions and hold those responsible accountable.
Additionally, according to the UK Barristers’ Code of Conduct, barristers must act with honesty and integrity and avoid behaviour that undermines public confidence in the profession. Gallagher’s actions—misrepresenting her role and spreading unfounded allegations—contravene these principles. The UK Bar Standards Board should investigate her conduct and, if violations are confirmed, consider revoking her license.
It is deeply concerning that a prominent legal jurisdiction like the UK allows such activities within its legal profession. Hong Kong reserves the right to pursue accountability for the damage caused to its judicial system by this "foreign fake legal team."
Wing-hung Lo
Bastille Commentary
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Trump's Venezuela play just gave Western progressives a masterclass in American hypocrisy.
Steve Bannon, Trump's longtime strategist, told The New York Times the Venezuela assault—arresting President Nicolás Maduro and all—stands as this administration's most consequential foreign policy move. Meticulously planned, Bannon concedes, but woefully short on ideological groundwork. "The lack of framing of the message on a potential occupation has the base bewildered, if not angry".
Trump's rationale for nabbing Maduro across international borders was drug trafficking. But here's the tell: once Maduro was in custody, Trump stopped talking about Venezuelan cocaine and started obsessing over Venezuelan oil. He's demanding US oil companies march back into Venezuela to seize control of local assets. And that's not all—he wants Venezuela to cough up 50 million barrels of oil.
Trump's Colonial Playbook
On January 6, Trump unveiled his blueprint: Venezuela releases 50 million barrels to the United States. America sells it. Market watchers peg the haul at roughly $2.8 billion.
Trump then gleefully mapped out how the proceeds would flow—only to "American-made products." He posted on social media: "These purchases will include, among other things, American Agricultural Products, and American Made Medicines, Medical Devices, and Equipment to improve Venezuela's Electric Grid and Energy Facilities. In other words, Venezuela is committing to doing business with the United States of America as their principal partner."
Trump's demand for 50 million barrels up front—not a massive volume, granted—betrays a blunt short-term goal. It's the classic imperial playbook: invade a colony, plunder its resources, sail home and parade the spoils before your supporters to justify the whole bloody enterprise. Trump isn't chasing the ideological legitimacy Bannon mentioned. He's after something more primal: material legitimacy. Show me a colonial power that didn't loot minerals or enslave labor from its colonies.
America's Western allies were silent as the grave when faced with such dictatorial swagger. But pivot the camera to Hong Kong, and suddenly they're all righteous indignation.
The British Double Standard
Recently, former Conservative Party leader Iain Duncan Smith penned an op-ed in The Times, slamming the British government for doing "nothing but issuing 'strongly worded' statements in the face of Beijing's trampling of the Sino-British Joint Declaration." He's calling on the Labour government to sanction the three designated National Security Law judges who convicted Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai of "collusion with foreign forces"—to prove that "Hong Kong's judiciary has become a farce." Duncan Smith even vowed to raise the matter for debate in the British Parliament.
The Conservatives sound principled enough. But think it through, and it's laughable. The whole world's talking about Maduro right now—nobody's talking about Jimmy Lai anymore.
Maduro appeared in US Federal Court in New York on January 6. The United States has trampled international law and the UN Charter—that's what Duncan Smith would call "American justice becoming a farce." If Duncan Smith's so formidable, why doesn't he demand the British government sanction Trump? Why not sanction the New York Federal Court judges? If he wants to launch a parliamentary debate, why not urgently debate America's crimes in invading Venezuela? Duncan Smith's double standards are chilling.
Silence on Venezuela
After the Venezuela incident, I searched extensively online—even deployed AI—but couldn't find a single comment from former Conservative leader Duncan Smith on America's invasion of Venezuela. Duncan Smith has retreated into his shell.
Duncan Smith is fiercely pro-US. When Trump visited the UK last September amid considerable domestic criticism, the opposition Conservatives didn't just stay quiet—Duncan Smith actively defended him, calling Trump's unprecedented second UK visit critically important: "if the countries that believe in freedom, democracy and the rule of law don’t unite, the totalitarian states… will dominate the world and it will be a terrible world to live in."
The irony cuts deep now. America forcibly seizes another country's oil and minerals—Trump is fundamentally an imperialist dictator. With Duncan Smith's enthusiastic backing, this totalitarian Trump has truly won.
Incidentally, the Conservative Party has completely destroyed itself. The party commanding the highest support in Britain today is the far-right Reform Party. As early as last May, YouGov polling showed Reform Party capturing the highest support at 29%, the governing Labour Party languishing at just 22%, the Liberal Democrats ranking third at 17%, and the Conservatives degraded to fourth place with 16% support.
The gutless Conservative Party members fear offending Trump, while voters flock to the Reform Party instead. The Conservatives' posturing shows they've become petty villains for nothing.
Lo Wing-hung
