Ted Hui had secret funds transferred overseas while fleeing Hong Kong

Mark Pinkstone/Former Chief Information Officer of HK government

Renegade lawyer and fugitive from Hong Kong justice, Ted Hui Chi-fung, who had his Hong Kong assets confiscated this week by the Court of First Instance, has a secret stash overseas, according to interviews he had with foreign media.

On Monday (Feb.17) the court ordered the confiscation of assets worth about $800,000 from Hui after it was learned that he had already given $2.5 million in assets to his mother and wife before and after he absconded from Hong Kong in December 2020. Assets held by a law firm in Hong Kong have also been confiscated.

The Hong Kong Police Force confirmed to local media that Hui was suspected of embezzling crowdfunding money from his relatives' accounts and was being investigated for money laundering.

In an interview with the Australian Financial Review recently, Hui admitted that during a brief reprieve in the freezing of his accounts in 2020, he was able to get most of his money out before the freeze was reinstated. He made a similar statement to The Guardian saying he was able to transfer “the majority of funds” out of Hong Kong. Hui had at least five accounts at HSBC, Hang Seng Bank and Bank of China (Hong Kong) belonging to him and his family members. There are suggestions in some quarters that this transfer could be in the range of about $12 million.

As soon as the court order was made, Hui protested violently on his Facebook site that the ruling was absurd and was a violation of human rights.

The HKSAR Government reacted to clarify that: "Hong Kong is a society underpinned by the rule of law and has always adhered to the principle that laws must be obeyed, and lawbreakers be held accountable. Amongst others, it is a common and effective practice to make an application to the Court for a confiscation order to prevent offenders from benefiting from their criminal acts. In fact, laws and mechanisms for confiscation of crime proceeds are common around the world. They cover the crime proceeds from commission of any serious offence, including offences endangering national security."

Its statement noted that Hui had committed numerous heinous crimes, with a number of criminal charges being laid against him. He conspired with foreign politicians in 2020 to forge documents and deceive the court with false information in order to obtain the court's permission to leave Hong Kong while he was on bail, jumped bail and absconded overseas. Afterwards, he was suspected to have committed offences endangering national security overseas. On August 12, 2021, and June 21, 2023, two magistrates issued warrants against Hui for allegedly committed crimes of 'inciting secession', 'inciting subversion of state power', and 'colluding with foreign or external forces to endanger national security'. Hui is a wanted person with reward notice by the Police.

Police said Hui has advocated Taiwan independence, Hong Kong independence and the overthrow of China's basic system through social media.

"Between January 2021 and December 2022, Hui published posts on social media to request foreign countries to impose sanctions and engage in other hostile activities against the PRC and the Hong Kong SAR," a police warrant read.

The police also alleged Hui has colluded with foreign forces and is an advisory board member of anti-China groups Hong Kong Watch in the United Kingdom and Hong Kong Democracy Council in the United States. He lobbied Western politicians and officials to impose sanctions against the mainland and Hong Kong, police said.

Hui has always been troublesome. He first caught media attention for his protests in the Legislative Council. In 2014, he was ejected from a meeting of the council's working group on civic education when protesting the council's decision to grant HK$150,000 to pro-Beijing groups.

Hui was also considered to be quite radical within the Democratic Party when he opposed the party's meetings with Beijing officials. And, in April 2018, Hui was under police investigation for snatching a Security Bureau executive officer's phone and taking it to a Legislative Council Complex toilet on 24 April 2018. The Democratic Party suspended the lawmaker and criticized him for seriously tarnishing the reputation of lawmakers.
Hui disrupted the second reading of the National Anthem Bill in the Legislative Council by dropping a container containing rotten plant matter inside the chamber. A fellow lawmaker was taken to hospital after being exposed to the smell. Hui and two other lawmakers, Eddie Chu and Raymond Chan, were charged with hindering the business of the council and violating the Powers and Privileges Ordinance, with Hui having dropped the foul-smelling liquid during the LegCo session. Hui was subsequently fined HK$52,000.

When Hui decided to jump bail, he fled to Denmark with the help of political friends under the guise that he was attending an environmental meeting. From there he went to London and then to Australia, where his sister lives. He said that he would be practising full time at a law firm – RSA Law – in Adelaide, mainly focusing on civil and commercial cases, and would help Hongkongers who had applied for asylum in the country. Hui finished a law degree in Hong Kong but never practised.

He now lives in Adelaide, South Australia, where he passed integrity vetting despite having boasted that he faced a total of 23 charges in Hong Kong and had seven warrants out for his arrest, claiming his admission as a lawyer was a “slap on the face” for Hong Kong authorities. But then, again, Australia’s foundation is based on the importation of criminals.

Mark Pinkstone

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

The conclusion of the Jimmy Lai Chee-ying trial, which lasted 156 days, was a showcase on law and order in Hong Kong and showed that justice seen is justice done.

A panel of three judges – Esther Toh Lye-ping, Susana D’Almada Remedios and Alex Lee – delivered their verdict on Monday that Jimmy Lai was guilty of national security charges involving two counts of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and one count of conspiracy to print seditious articles.

In their ruling, detailed in an 855-page document, the judges said Lai was the “mastermind” behind the conspiracies, with his sole intent was to “seek the downfall” of the ruling Communist Party.

The trial, which spanned two years (December 2023-2025), with breaks in between, drew international attention through a global campaign by his son, Sebastien, and his team of public relations cum legal experts, Doughty Street Chambers, of London.

They kept the story alive visiting world leaders and TV networks pleading for Lai senior’s release from custody citing poor health. And they got the sound bites they wanted, but the end result was useless. Jimmy Lai was found guilty as charged and could face life imprisonment, the maximum penalty for collusion.

Before passing sentence, the judges will hear mitigating arguments from Lai’s solicitors on January 12 as to why he should be sentenced and if so for a minimum period. They will surely use Lai’s deteriorating health as their main argument.

After the mitigating hearing, which is expected to last about a week, the judges will retire to decide Lai’s fate.

An interesting aspect of the trial is its open transparency. Although Hong Kong is rated 6th in the Asia/Pacific region and 24th out of 143 countries worldwide by the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index, the Lai lobbyists branded the High Court as a “sham court.”

The territory’s prosecuting office and the Chief Executive decided on a three-member panel of judges to hear the case instead of going for a full jury hearing. The reason is obvious: it would be difficult to find a seven- or 12-member panel of ordinary citizens who had not heard of the Jimmy Lai arrest and formed an opinion before the trial started.

The courtroom was specially configured to allow 58 seats in the public gallery and another 42 for the press in the main courtroom. Of those, 21 are allocated to local media, 14 to international outlets and seven to digital news platforms.

A group of about 16 western diplomats arrived at the court at around 8.20am on Monday morning with representatives from the UK, the US, the EU and Canada among them to hear the verdict and report back to their respective foreign ministers. Most of them attended the hearings every day to observe the fairness of the court. Never has a Hong Kong court hearing been under such intense scrutiny.

It could not be more transparent. It was open to the world. From the first day that prosecution witnesses gave their evidence to the closing remarks by the defendant, the foreign diplomats and international press were there recording every word spoken.

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to call it a “sham court” and international reaction will be interesting. Their comments could implicate their complicity in Lai’s masterplan to overthrow the Chinese government.

Speaking outside the West Kowloon Law Courts Building on Monday, shortly after the guilty verdict was delivered, Chief Superintendent Steve Li Kwai-wah of the police force’s National Security Department said Lai’s conviction was “justice served.”

Lai “exploited his media enterprise” and used his wealth and “extensive foreign political connections” to collude with foreign powers, Li said.

His views were echoed by Secretary for Security Chris Tang Ping-keung who believed that the trial illustrates how safe Hong Kong is and how we are able to interdict all the national security concerns and all the attempts to affect the national security. “I think this is a good showcase to show that Hong Kong is safe and it is safe to do investments in Hong Kong,” he said.

Indeed. The Jimmy Lai trial was a showcase on how Hong Kong’s rule of law and judicial prudence can shape the city to make it the Pearl of the Orient.