Testimony of Retired LegCo Member Challenges Prosecution’s Narrative
During the ongoing trial of former pro-democracy legislator Lam Cheuk-ting, retired pro-establishment lawmaker Abraham Shek provided testimony that directly contradicts the prosecution’s claims. Shek, who was a member of the Legislative Council (LegCo) at the time of the 2019 incident, stated that Lam did not pose any threat to him during a chaotic meeting related to the controversial extradition bill.
Lam, a former Democratic Party lawmaker, appeared in court on Tuesday and faces charges of assaulting or obstructing pro-Beijing legislators, including Ben Chan and Holden Chow. These allegations stem from a tense session that took place on May 11, 2019, when pro-democracy lawmakers were reportedly attempting to disrupt the proceedings.
Shek’s account stands in contrast to the testimonies of Chan and Chow, who previously testified for the prosecution. They claimed that they and other pro-establishment lawmakers were protecting Shek, who was tasked with chairing the bills committee meeting. At the time, Shek was 74 years old and had heart problems, according to the court records.
Now retired, Shek took the witness stand on Tuesday to support Lam’s defense. He disputed the prosecution’s claim that Lam was among those trying to snatch his microphone. According to Shek, the real threat came from other pro-democracy lawmakers, such as Eddie Chu, Gary Fan, and Au Nok-hin, who were seen attempting to climb over him and grab the microphone.
The court reviewed footage showing Lam standing behind Shek during the chaos. In the video, Lam was seen talking to Shek and reaching out to touch his arm. Shek emphasized that he did not feel any danger from Lam and another pro-democracy lawmaker, Kwok Ka-ki, who was also seen grabbing his arm. Instead, he pointed to the actions of Chu, Fan, and Au as the main threats.
Chu, Fan, and Au were also charged in the case. Chu pleaded guilty, while Fan had his charges dropped. Au received a bind-over order, meaning he was not convicted but must maintain good behavior. Lam is the only one who has pleaded not guilty.
A Colleague’s Concern
Shek also shared details about his interactions with Lam before the meeting. He mentioned that Lam had spoken to him a day or two prior, warning him about the potential commotion and advising him to be cautious about his health. During the chaos, Lam touched Shek’s arm and asked if he was okay. This action was captured in the footage played in court, although Lam’s words were not recorded in the audio.
When Lam testified on Monday, prosecutor William Siu suggested that Lam’s physical contact with Shek lasted 24 seconds and was an attempt to help others snatch the microphone. Lam denied this claim, and Shek confirmed his account, stating that the contact was not forceful.
Catherine Wong, representing Lam, asked Shek whether he believed Lam was fulfilling his duties as a lawmaker. Shek responded that while he could not confirm whether Lam was performing his legislative duties, he was certainly acting as a colleague by checking on Shek’s well-being.
The Broader Context
As the trial continued, Siu questioned Shek about his awareness of opposition lawmakers’ intentions to stop the extradition bill. Shek acknowledged that he was aware of their efforts but also recognized their right to object. He added that he, too, was against the bill but could accept it after amendments.
Siu also asked whether Shek knew that pro-democracy lawmakers wanted to prevent him from leading the meeting. Shek confirmed this, stating that he would not have entered the meeting surrounded by protectors if he had not been aware of the situation.
At one point, Siu urged Shek to respond more succinctly, suggesting that his answers were not addressing the questions directly. Shek, however, emphasized the importance of truth over speed, saying, “Time is not important. It is not of the essence. Truth is of the essence.”
Lam’s Defense
On Tuesday morning, Lam testified and denied preventing Shek from holding the meeting. He explained that he was concerned about the chaotic conditions and requested that the meeting be paused because he could not hear what was happening. Lam confirmed that he saw Fan attempt to snatch Shek’s microphone but denied agreeing with Fan’s actions.
When asked why he did not stop Fan, Lam explained that if Siu understood their backgrounds, he would know that Fan would not listen to him. He added that Fan had left the Democratic Party in a manner that was “not very ideal.” Fan was a co-founder of Neo Democrats, a localist party that split from the Democratic Party in 2010.
The case was adjourned to October 30 for closing arguments, with the verdict tentatively set for November 6.
