The Jimmy Lai Chronicle: What the Court was Told (5): The UK Connection: Jimmy Lai’s Busy Network

Jimmy Lai, founder of Next Digital, was convicted of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces. The judgment and court documents show exactly what that looked like: years of contact with anti-China figures in the UK, donations to Hong Kong Watch funneled through his assistant Mark Simon, and repeated efforts to amplify the British parliamentary group IPAC—the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China.

Money to Build Network

Court documents identify Benedict Rogers, founder of Hong Kong Watch, as a central figure in Lai's "UK network." Lai testified he first met Rogers after Hong Kong denied him entry in 2017. After that, Rogers contacted Lai directly when he wanted to publish opinion pieces in Apple Daily. Lai made multiple donations to Rogers' organization through Mark Simon, including one payment of £20,000.

Lai told the court he noticed British society paid less attention to Hong Kong issues than America did. Rogers' activities, he said, could help more people in the UK understand Hong Kong's situation. He also pointed out Rogers had deep ties to British political circles, including Lord Alton of the House of Lords and Chris Patten, the last British Governor of Hong Kong.

Lai claimed repeatedly during trial that he had "never heard of" IPAC. The prosecution's electronic communication records tell a different story. Lai not only knew about the organization before it launched—he actively promoted it and stayed in frequent contact with its core members.

On May 31, 2020, Rogers messaged Lai to tell him his friend Luke de Pulford was organizing the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, with Rogers himself participating as an advisor. Rogers said de Pulford hoped to connect with Lai and asked if he could pass along Lai's phone number. Lai immediately agreed.

The next day, de Pulford sent Lai an introductory document about IPAC. On June 3, he forwarded another document titled "Press Release: Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC)" to Lai, announcing IPAC's official establishment with members from nine national parliaments. The stated goal: urging governments to adopt tougher policies toward China.

Publishing on Command

When Lai received the press release, he immediately forwarded it to Apple Daily's Associate Publisher Chan Pui-man with instructions to "handle the story" and a note: "publish it in tomorrow's paper." That same day, he told Chan that de Pulford would send photos to accompany the news.

On June 5, 2020, Apple Daily ran the story with the headline "Nine Parliaments Form Alliance to Strongly Resist CCP, Condemning Forced Implementation of Hong Kong National Security Law as Trampling Human Rights." The article included a photo of de Pulford and former Civic Party Chairman Alan Leong.

The judgment noted Apple Daily published multiple reports about IPAC between June and October of that year. On June 13, the newspaper ran a story on page A5 about Italian and Dutch lawmakers joining IPAC. On June 15, a column titled "Ears by the Wall" published a piece called "Laam Chau Ba Joins International Coalition to Resist," noting that "Laam Chau Ba has launched wave after wave of actions, such as crowdfunding global newspaper ads... Recently Laam Chau Ba had good news – the Laam Chau team officially joined IPAC, formed by lawmakers from multiple countries."

The judgment also mentioned de Pulford and Lai were not strangers. As early as October 2019, Lai had forwarded to Mark Simon a message from Rogers about de Pulford and Lord Alton's visit to Taiwan, providing de Pulford's phone number. Lai also dined with de Pulford in Hong Kong in November 2019, when Lord Alton visited Hong Kong under the pretext of "observing the District Council elections."

In March 2020, Lai forwarded an article co-written by Rogers and de Pulford to Chan Pui-man and Chief Editor Ryan Law Wai-kwong with the instruction to "see if we can help them out." Before the Taipei conference in January, Lai forwarded de Pulford's open letter to a friend, describing it as "a brilliant open letter."

On June 11, de Pulford sent Lai another IPAC press release stating that "within one week of the organization's establishment, membership had grown to over a hundred lawmakers from thirteen countries." Lai forwarded the document to Law Wai-kwong the next day with a note: "This is from de Pulford, see if it's useful." On June 13, he posted on his personal Twitter praising the effort: "Delighted to see lawmakers from various countries transcending political positions to jointly face the global challenge of the CCP."

Lai repeatedly forwarded IPAC-related information after that, including Twitter links and press releases. On July 22, de Pulford told him: "We need to arrange meetings between Nathan Law and European heads of state." Lai replied: "Excellent! This will give him greater international credibility."

After the National Security Law

In early August, de Pulford informed Lai he and Nathan Law would file a private prosecution against Hong Kong police officers in the UK, hoping Apple Daily could cover it. Lai replied expressing gratitude for the support. The following day, he received another IPAC press release and forwarded it to Chan and Law, noting: "This is from de Pulford, please decide whether to use it."

The court found these records clearly showed Lai maintained long-term contact with de Pulford and repeatedly helped promote IPAC activities. His claims of "not knowing" were completely untenable.

After the Hong Kong National Security Law took effect, IPAC members pushed for sanctions against then-Chief Executive Carrie Lam and other officials in the British Parliament. De Pulford informed Lai before the action and received a supportive response. Lai also shared related posts on social media.

On October 24, 2020, Apple Daily published an exclusive interview revealing that "Laam Chau Brother's" real identity was Finn Lau. In the interview, Lau discussed his overseas advocacy work for the "Laam Chau Team" and "Stand with Hong Kong (SWHK)."

That same day, Lai posted on his personal Twitter noting that Lau was only 26 years old but had wisdom and could accurately judge when and what role to play. He said Lau's previous role had inspired his peers, and this time he would do the same. International support was very important, Lai stated. He believed Lau had wisdom, had joined an international coalition, and knew when to play the right role. 

These actions showed Lai continued actively participating in activities promoting sanctions against the SAR Government even after the Hong Kong National Security Law took effect. 

During trial, when the judge asked Lai why he didn't block de Pulford, Lai answered: "Because he's doing good things for Hong Kong." The judge commented that Lai regarded "promoting sanctions against Hong Kong" as a "good thing," demonstrating Lai clearly knew about IPAC's establishment and activities, and actively provided it with a promotional platform.

Law ABC

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

Conspiracy to publish seditious publications. Conspiracy to collude with foreign forces – twice. Those are the charges that just landed Jimmy Lai, founder of Next Digital, twenty years behind bars, the highest sentence under Hong Kong's National Security Law so far. That makes Lai the first defendant convicted for colluding with foreign forces, and the punishment is the heaviest handed down since the law took effect in 2020.

Article 29 of the National Security Law sets the baseline at three to 10 years for collusion offenses. But for "serious cases," the ceiling shoots up – either life imprisonment or a fixed term of at least 10 years.

To determine whether Lai's actions qualified as a "serious case," the court turned to precedent. The sentencing guidelines from the Court of Final Appeal's ruling in HKSAR v. Lui Sai Yu served as the framework. Judges also examined HKSAR v. Ma Chun-man and adjusted the approach based on the specific circumstances surrounding Lai's offenses.

Status Drives Sentence Higher

The court determined that Lai was the "mastermind" and "driving force" behind the conspiracies. That designation carried weight at sentencing. For the seditious publications charge, judges bumped the starting point from 21 months to 23. For each of the two collusion charges, they added three years to the original 15-year baseline, pushing it to 18 years.

But the court did acknowledge reality. Lai is old – 78 years old, to be exact. Taking account of his health and that he's held in solitary confinement, which makes prison conditions harsher than for typical inmates, judges shaved one month off the seditious publications term and one year off each collusion charge. The final tally: 20 years total.

Consider the comparison to Benny Tai, the legal scholar convicted in the "35+" subversion case. The court labeled Tai the mastermind behind the unauthorized primary election scheme – the organizer who pushed the "10 steps to mutual destruction" plan that amounted to advocating revolution. His starting point was 15 years. Because he pleaded guilty, Tai received a one-third reduction, bringing his sentence to 10 years. That made him the most heavily punished of the 45 defendants convicted in that sprawling case.

No Plea Deal, No Mercy

Lai chose a different path. He didn't plead guilty. That meant no sentence reduction – and judges actually added time. The judgment revealed the court's view: Lai harboured deep resentment toward China for years. Whether before or after the National Security Law took effect, his singular goal was bringing down the Chinese Communist Party, even if it meant sacrificing the interests of Hong Kong people. Today's sentencing remarks emphasized that Lai, as the mastermind, acted with careful planning and premeditation.

The math is brutal. National Security Law convicts don't qualify for the standard one-third remission of sentence. At 78, Lai could remain locked up until he's 98.

Three former Apple Daily senior executives caught up in the same case fared differently. Former editor-in-chief Law Wai Kwong, former executive editor-in-chief Lam Man  Chung, and former lead editorial writer and English edition executive editor Fung Wai Kong each pleaded guilty. They received 10 years each – the same term as Benny Tai.

The reality is, that 10-year term represents the statutory minimum. Judges classified their offenses as "serious" too, but credited their guilty pleas with a one-third reduction. Since they didn't testify or assist prosecutors beyond admitting guilt, that was all the leniency they got.

Four Years of Enforcement History

The Hong Kong National Security Law came into force on June 30, 2020, targeting four main categories of offenses: secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with foreign forces – the last being what authorities charged Lai with.

Since the law took effect, Hong Kong has seen several high-profile prosecutions. The first came quickly: Tong Ying-kit's case. On July 1, 2020 – just hours after the law became operational – Tong rode a motorcycle bearing a "Liberate Hong Kong" flag straight into a police cordon in Wan Chai, injuring three officers. He was convicted of inciting secession and committing terrorist activities, drawing a nine-year sentence. The court set 6.5 years as the starting point for incitement and eight years for terrorism, with portions running concurrently.

Then there was the "Returning Valiant" group case, which involved a genuine bomb plot. Members planned to plant explosives at the Kwun Tong and Tuen Mun Magistrates' Courts and in cross-harbour tunnels. The ringleader, Ho Yu-wang, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit terrorist activities. Six others admitted to an alternative charge of conspiring to cause explosions likely to endanger life or property. Three landed in detention centres; the remaining three received prison terms ranging from 2.5 to 6 years.

The "Alliance" case is still working its way through the courts. The now-disbanded Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China faces charges along with its former leaders. Former chair Lee Cheuk-yan, vice-chair Albert Ho Chun-yan, and standing committee member Chow Hang-tung are accused of inciting others to subvert state power. Ho has pleaded guilty and awaits sentencing. The other defendants are fighting the charges.