After serving time in the “35+” subversion case, Andrew Chiu Ka-yin is putting on the record: the 2019 “Black Riots” and the so-called “primary elections” were not some organic political wave, but a “scheme” steered by people with ulterior motives. It matters because it goes straight to intent and orchestration. In an exclusive TVB News interview, he admitted that he hated himself for not able to disconnect himself with the situation and the extreme violence at that time.
Chiu, sentenced to seven years, was released early in late October after sentence deductions, becoming the first national security prisoner freed early since the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance took effect.
Chiu says he owed Hong Kong people the truth—and he’s finally saying it.
In the “35+” case, Chiu didn’t just appear as a defendant—he also served as a accomplice witness, and the court materials listed him as an organizer alongside Benny Tai Yiu-ting, Au Nok-hin, and Ben Chung Kam‑lun. The court sentenced him as a “principal offender” for conspiracy to commit subversion against state power, setting the term at seven years. He ultimately walked out after nearly five years served, following deductions.
Chiu told TVB News he wanted to assist the prosecution within the first months of detention, framing it as a duty to tell the truth although he feared retaliation after release.
When violence crossed the line
Chiu pinpointed two episodes from the anti-extradition bill period that, in his words, disgusted him most. One involved student “Kin Chai” Tsang Chi-kin in a riot case—Chiu said Tsang was persuaded to pay for an escape and then “betrayed.” The other was the Ma On Shan incident in which an elderly man was set on fire after arguing with protesters. Chiu said the situation had spiraled into something frightening, yet he stayed silent because he was already entangled in the political camp and felt bound by bloc loyalty. He now says he hates himself for not speaking up then.
He said he does not agree with violence—and he cast himself not only as a former participant in the political current, but also as a victim of violence. In November 2019, he was attacked outside Taikoo Shing Centre by a middle-aged man, Chan Chun, who stabbed him and bit off his left ear; Chan was later sentenced to 14 years in prison.
Chiu’s core argument is blunt: from the amendment storm to riots to the so-called “primary elections,” he now sees the entire arc as a coordinated “scheme,” manipulated by people with ulterior motives to strike at the SAR government and the country’s constitutional order. On that basis, he said he wants to apologize to the country, Hong Kong, and the general public, and he stressed he won’t return to politics anytime soon—and won’t emigrate either.
As an insider put it, Chiu’s confession forces Hong Kong people to confront the level of violence seen in 2019, describing it as reaching the level of terrorist attacks. Jimmy Lai and his Apple Daily as advocates of “no differentiation between peaceful and valiant protesters,” makes him the instigator and chief culprit.
The Apple Daily playbook
Yesterday (December 15) Jimmy Lai was convicted on three counts: conspiracy to publish seditious publications and collusion with foreign forces. The court's judgment summary—written by three National Security Law judges—puts him at the forefront as protests morphed into a resistance movement. Both Lai and Apple Daily were "leading the charge," according to the judges' written reasoning. If you want the "receipts," that's where they are: in the court's own words.
An insider who watched the interview offered a straightforward read: Chiu's remorse is genuine. That matters because it reflects how the Central Government and the SAR Government enforce the law—strictly, but with room for mercy. Truly repentant national security prisoners get a shot at early release.
The warning is equally direct: diehard anti-Hong Kong elements should not expect leniency. In other words, remorse may open doors, but obstinacy won’t—and the legal system will treat them accordingly.
Ariel
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
Jimmy Lai, the founder of Next Digital, has been convicted on all three counts of violating Hong Kong's National Security Law. The court found that Lai exploited social unrest and public disorder to incite citizens to confront the government. During his own defense, Lai admitted he pushed young people into the streets simply to create optics—a "visual" showing that people of different ages opposed the government. Li Kwai-wah, Chief Superintendent of the National Security Department, called Lai out directly: to him, young people were just tools to accomplish his political tasks. Despicable doesn't begin to cover it.
The court identified Lai as the mastermind behind three conspiracy charges and concluded that his sole objective—both before and after the National Security Law took effect—was to bring down the Chinese Communist Party.
The Timeline: From Legal Reform to Sedition
The verdict lays out the background: In February 2019, the HKSAR government proposed amendments to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance to address legal gaps in handling cross-jurisdictional cases. From that point on, Lai weaponized Apple Daily to push citizens into the streets to protest the draft amendments.
What started as demonstrations escalated into resistance. Lai seized on the social chaos and breakdown in public order, turning Apple Daily into a platform for seditious articles designed to provoke hatred and confrontation against the Central Government and the HKSAR government.
Speaking to reporters, Li Kwai-wah stressed what everyone should focus on: Jimmy Lai's role in the "Black Riots" events. For Lai, young people were nothing more than tools to help him achieve his political goals. That's what makes this so heinous.
Lai's Own Words: Students Were Just "Visuals"
During his defense, Lai personally admitted that on June 8, 2019, in a WhatsApp group created by Lee Cheuk-yan to mobilize participation in that year's "June 9 March," he forwarded a message suggested by Martin Lee. The message called for more young people to take to the streets and join the march—specifically to use the visuals of the march to highlight that people of different age groups were dissatisfied with the government. Lai also admitted in court that he had instructed staff to interview petitioning students to inspire other students to join the marches.
Trial evidence showed that the "Video Talk" and "Support Students Subscription Plan" promoted by Apple Daily during the protests—under Lai's direction—were deliberately targeted at young people to incite them to participate in anti-government movements.
Li Kwai-wah slammed Lai for treating "students and young people" as nothing more than a "visual" to achieve political ends. But strategically inciting young people to engage in anti-government activities led to many of them ending up in prison with their futures destroyed, causing immense heartbreak for their parents.
Lai was the driving force behind the entire chaos and cannot escape responsibility. His crimes are too numerous to list, and the evidence is ironclad.
The Double Standard Lai Won't Address
Leung Chun-ying, Vice Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), put it bluntly on social media: Jimmy Lai has harmed an entire generation of Hong Kong teenagers. "For this alone, what sentence could possibly be too severe?"
Leung said he has read almost all of Jimmy Lai's signed articles in Apple Daily and his interviews with foreign media, and has consistently rebutted them publicly. He pointed out that Lai seriously misjudged both the domestic and international situation—grossly overestimating his leverage—thinking that lip service support from the US and Western countries meant he could act with impunity.
Leung argued that during the trial, Lai first made strategic errors, then was riddled with mistakes and contradictions during cross-examination. "If he really is a 'political prisoner' as some Westerners claim, why not just keep pretending to be a hero? Why push the blame for Apple Daily's sedition onto his subordinates? Why argue that he 'did not interfere with editorial decisions'? Why say 'instructions regarding part of the editorial content were issued before the National Security Law took effect, and afterwards content had to avoid illegality while walking a fine line'? Why say 'columns only listed facts or analysis and speculation'?" Leung noted that only a political coward would defend himself in this manner.
Leung also noted that Lai claimed to be a British citizen, yet the UK, the US, and other Western countries would absolutely not allow their own citizens to collude with foreign forces. Leung emphasized that Lai was the flag-bearer, the brains, the treasurer, and the mouthpiece who charged forward blindly, harming an entire generation of Hong Kong teenagers. For this point alone, no sentence could possibly be too severe!
Leung also posted in English, stating that Jimmy Lai is neither a democrat nor a freedom fighter as depicted by certain Western media and politicians. For years, Lai attempted to convert the high degree of autonomy Hong Kong enjoys under the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law into de facto independence for Hong Kong, thereby undermining the nation's sovereignty over Hong Kong. He was even audacious enough to plot the overthrow of the Central Government. He might be an ignorant fool, but he is definitely not innocent.
