On April 2, The HKSAR government applies to the court to confiscate property connected to crimes committed by Jimmy Lai.
The SAR government files an application with the High Court Court of First Instance to confiscate Jimmy Lai's property under Article 43 of the Hong Kong National Security Law Implementation Rules.
The SAR government states that the confiscation order "prevents those who commit offenses endangering national security, their accomplices, or agents from using property linked to their crimes to continue engaging in acts that threaten national security. This cuts off the funding chain for such offenses and diminishes their capacity to reoffend."
Earlier, Jimmy Lai was found guilty by the High Court of three offenses endangering national security and was ultimately sentenced to 20 years in prison. The court described Lai as the "mastermind and instigator" who deliberately leveraged Apple Daily and his personal influence to conduct a sustained campaign aimed at undermining the legitimacy and authority of the Central Government, the Hong Kong SAR government, and its institutions.
He severely damaged the relationship between the Central Government, the SAR government, and Hong Kong residents beyond legal limits. He also repeatedly colluded personally with foreign forces, petitioning them to impose sanctions on both governments and carry out hostile actions. The circumstances were extremely serious.
According to Schedule 3, Section 1.1 of the Implementation Rules, "crime-related property" means (a) property owned by a person who commits or assists in committing offenses endangering national security, or (b) any property intended for use or previously used to fund or otherwise assist in committing offenses endangering national security.
In other words, Jimmy Lai has committed offenses endangering national security, and all his assets are classified as "crime-related property." The known assets mainly include shares in Next Digital and its subsidiaries.
It is important to note that Article 2 of Schedule 3 to the Implementation Rules states that "This schedule applies to property whether it is situated in Hong Kong or elsewhere." If Lai transfers assets outside Hong Kong or even to his children overseas, the Hong Kong SAR government still has the authority to recover them.
According to Article 3.1 of Schedule 3 to the Implementation Rules, the Secretary for Security may issue a written freeze order on any property reasonably suspected to be crime-related property. Anyone who violates such an order faces fines and up to seven years’ imprisonment. Thus, transferring related assets is a criminal offense in itself.
So, is property confiscation unique to Hong Kong?
Certainly not. Hong Kong’s asset confiscation orders focus on extremely serious crimes like violations of the National Security Law, money laundering, and bribery. But the United States casts a much wider net, as reflected in its confiscated assets.
Media reports show the US government holds 326,588 bitcoins, making it the world’s largest government bitcoin holder. All were seized, mainly from the Silk Road darknet, the Bitfinex platform, and several major cases involving the Prince Group. The Prince Group case is the largest single bitcoin forfeiture ever by the US Department of Justice, confiscating 127,271 bitcoins from Prince Group leader Chen Zhi, suspected of telecom fraud—worth $14 billion at the time.
The amount of Bitcoin confiscated by the United States alone is staggering, making Hong Kong’s figures look minuscule by comparison. The US appears to use criminal asset forfeiture as a tool to boost government revenue, while Hong Kong focuses on seizing criminal assets primarily to prevent crimes from happening.
Although 'Fatty' Lai is already behind bars, people overseas continue violating the National Security Law during his trial, attacking Hong Kong’s judicial system. Money drives everything in this world, and confiscating Fatty Lai’s assets cuts off critical funding channels linked to these offenses.
Lo Wing-hung
Bastille Commentary
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
US President Trump's baffling maneuvers have trapped himself in a chaotic command dilemma in the war against Iran.
Online commentary jokes that Donald Trump follows "The Art of Donald", or say, “The Art of Don’t Know”—" If even I know not my next move, how then could the enemy? "—implying that Trump blindly charges ahead, and naturally the enemy can’t decipher his strategy because he has none at all.
Before launching the conflict with Iran, Trump relied heavily on the United States’ military supremacy—aircraft carriers, stealth fighters, Tomahawk missiles, and the THAAD defense system. He assumed a heavy bombardment campaign would either topple the Iranian regime or force it to surrender.
This single-script scenario repeated everywhere like a formula. When Iran’s actual response deviated from the script, Trump, the director, found himself at a loss and resorted to "The Art of Donald."
First, the bluffing
Just over a week ago, Trump concluded the war was unwinnable and called for peace talks with Iran. On March 30, he posted on his self-founded social media platform Truth Social, claiming serious negotiations with a "new, more rational regime" in Iran had made significant progress.
Yet, Trump simultaneously threatened that if talks failed, the US would utterly destroy all of Iran’s power plants, oil wells, and the oil export hub Kharg Island.
The United States keeps sending more Marine Corps troops to the Middle East as a clear show of force, trying to pressure Iran into talks. The goal is to quickly reach a ceasefire and force acceptance of the so-called "15-point ceasefire plan" pushed by the US, effectively demanding total surrender.
But, if deploying troops were so straightforward, Trump would have already sent forces on the ground. His repeated talk of troop deployments is more bluff than action—he is determined to avoid another Afghanistan-style quagmire. Iran has seen right through these empty threats.
Second, the blown cover
If Russia’s protracted three-year assault on Ukraine has gradually exposed its limits, the United States blew its cover in just three weeks—both diplomatically and militarily. Trump claimed for over a week that talks with Iran were underway, but Tehran has flatly denied it. On March 31, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Baghaei posted on the X platform, rejecting claims of negotiations. He said, "In the past 31 days, we have had no negotiations with the United States. The US has only transmitted a series of proposals to Iran via intermediaries including Pakistan." Baghaei emphasized that Iran hasn't forgotten past failed talks with the US
Trump has essentially been negotiating with thin air. If forced to choose between the US and Iranian accounts, I’d believe Iran. Genuine talks have not happened. The US has merely relayed peace proposals through third parties, with no real bargaining underway.
The US has also revealed military vulnerabilities. After Iran hit the supposedly invincible F-35 stealth fighter jet, on March 27 Iran attacked the US Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, damaging multiple American aircrafts. A $300 million E-3 Sentry Airborne Early
Warning and Control aircraft was struck by an Iranian missile on the runway as it prepared for takeoff, breaking in two—a first for the E-3 in wartime. This incident reveals serious flaws in the US missile defense system, thus allowing Iran’s destruction of such a vital early-warning aircraft.
Earlier, the US aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford had cited a laundry room fire before withdrawing from the Red Sea combat zone. But on March 17, Trump told the audience at a Saudi investment forum in Miami that the Ford was attacked. He said Iranian missiles struck the carrier from 17 different angles, putting the situation on board in grave danger. Trump's unexpected disclosure casts doubt on the official explanation that a laundry fire prompted the Ford’s exit from the Middle East, suggesting it was in fact hit and caught fire.
The US military’s cover is quickly blown in the US-Iran conflict.
Thirdly, Risks and Opportunities
Trump’s so-called “Art of Donald” lacks a follow-up plan, leaving a deadlock that stalls any deal with Iran. US officials told The Wall Street Journal, in a report published on March 30, that Trump informed aides he would be willing to halt military operations against Iran even if the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed. Instead, pressure would shift to diplomatic channels to restore free trade flow. Essentially, Trump plans to unilaterally halt hostilities if negotiations with Iran collapse.
With oil prices surging, the whole world must share the burden—Hong Kong included. Yet amid the chaos, Hong Kong finds some opportunities. On March 31, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that three Chinese vessels passed through the Strait of Hormuz, including the Hong Kong-registered container ships CSCL Arctic Ocean and CSCL Indian Ocean, which had been stranded in the Persian Gulf for over a month.
Since late February, this is the first time that China’s large ships have transited the Strait, restoring confidence in the global supply chain. Coordinated by the Chinese government, Hong Kong’s container ships remain among the few commercial vessels able to navigate Hormuz. Amid Middle East turmoil, Hong Kong stands out as an alternative stable choice—and it must seize these opportunities.
Lo Wing-hung
