A Hong Kong court has quashed the conviction of former opposition lawmaker Lam Cheuk-ting linked to his disclosure of an investigation by the city’s anti-graft watchdog into a senior police officer over the Yuen Long mob attack of 2019.
Lam, a former lawmaker from the opposition Democratic Party, was found guilty in January 2022 of three counts of disclosing the identity of people under investigation after he revealed an Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) inquiry into Superintendent Yau Nai-keung. He was sentenced to four months in jail.
On July 21, 2019, more than 100 rod-wielding men stormed Yuen Long MTR station and attacked protesters and other passengers, leaving 45 people injured including Lam, who said he was there to protect residents from the attack. Police have been criticised for their alleged inaction over the incident.
The 46-year-old politician disclosed that Yau, the then-assistant commander in Yuen Long, was being investigated by the ICAC for alleged misconduct in public office. Eastern Court Magistrate Jacky Ip ruled at the time that Lam’s disclosure had breached the city’s Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, which forbids the disclosure of such investigations.
But High Court Judge Douglas Yau on Thursday sided with Lam and ruled that he did not breach the law since it should not be interpreted broadly to include “any investigation.”
The judge said misconduct in public office was not covered in the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance. Instead, he said the protection against the disclosure of investigation should be confined to probes into bribery and corruption, which were listed in the ordinance.
“The appellant’s disclosure of the fact that Yau Nai-keung was under ICAC investigation for misconduct in public office was not covered by [the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance], henceforth the appellant did not breach the relevant law,” the judge said in a Chinese-language judgment.
Public interest
Despite quashing Lam’s conviction, the judge dismissed the former politician’s argument that his disclosure was justified on the grounds of public interest.
During a hearing last November, defence lawyer Erik Shum said Lam made the disclosure only because Yau had been promoted to the role of superintendent for New Territories North, where he would have jurisdiction over a police internal investigation into the attack. That amounted to “the police investigating their own people” and the revelation of the ICAC probe would be in the public interest, Shum said back then.
While the judge was convinced of Lam’s belief in the need for a thorough investigation into the Yuen Long attack, he questioned how the disclosure of the ICAC investigation would serve his cause.
“If the appellant finds that [Yau’s promotion] amounted to ‘the police investigating their own’… He should all the more support the ICAC – an organisation not under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Police – in its investigation into Yau Nai-keung,” the judge said.
“[Lam’s disclosure] certainly made it more difficult for the ICAC to investigate and gather evidence, increasing the risks of evidence being destroyed or concealed,” he added. “There are only harms and no benefit: the appellant’s disclosure was therefore counter-productive.”
The judge ordered the authorities to pay legal costs for the first trial and the appeal.
The ex-lawmaker has been remanded in custody since March 2021 on a separate national security charge related to an opposition primary.
Lam was also arrested in August 2020 and charged separately with taking part in a riot during the Yuen Long attack. He pleaded not guilty when the trial began in October last year. District Judge Stanley Chan ruled that Lam had a case to answer and adjourned the trial to March.
Support HKFP | Policies & Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
LATEST FROM HKFP
HKFP has an impartial stance, transparent funding, and balanced coverage guided by an Ethics Code and Corrections Policy.
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.
