Photo taken on May 5, 2020 shows Jimmy Lai Chee-ying appearing in court on unauthorized assembly charge in Hong Kong, China. (Xinhua/Lui Siu Wai)
Hong Kong's top court denied bail on Tuesday for media tycoon and secessionist Jimmy Lai, who will stay behind bars until his trial on national security charges in April.
The latest ruling is a landmark move considered by legal experts as "symbolic" and having significant deterrence, showing that the common law system of Hong Kong is adapting its bail conditions to the national security law.
The Court of Final Appeal ruled on Tuesday in favor of the Department of Justice (DOJ), which had challenged Lai's bail decision granted by the Hong Kong High Court on December 23. The Court of Final Appeal, the city's highest judicial institution, revoked the bail order for Lai on December 31.
The bail hearing proceeded on February 1 without coming up with any ruling, and the Court of Final Appeal ruled in favor of the DOJ by revoking the bail order issued by the High Court on Tuesday.
Lai was formally charged under the national security law for Hong Kong for colluding with foreign forces to endanger national security on December 11, in what was widely seen as a high-profile case. The 73-year-old has been considered a "modern-day traitor" for his notorious acts and deeds in instigating one of the most violent and chaotic riots in the city in 2019.
"The latest ruling is symbolic, and also means the common law system of Hong Kong has finally applied 'prudent bail'principle under the national security law for Hong Kong," Tian Feilong, an associate professor at Beihang University in Beijing and member of the Beijing-based Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies, told the Global Times on Tuesday.
Previously, some legal experts considered the case a landmark one as it was also deemed as a test of how Hong Kong's legal system interprets bail conditions under the national security law.
Article 42 of the national security law for Hong Kong states that no bail shall be granted to a criminal suspect or defendant unless the judge has sufficient grounds for believing that the criminal suspect or defendant will not continue to commit acts endangering national security.
The ruling on Lai's case is also seen as a major gauge of how to interpret Article 42 under the law, in other words, correctly understanding the national security law in context, some legal experts noted.