Jimmy Lai continues to direct Apple Daily operations despite detention, court heard

Prosecutors, delivering their closing submissions for a second day on Tuesday in Jimmy Lai Chee-ying’s national security trial, asserted that the media tycoon continued directing Apple Daily’s operations even after his arrest, maintaining his role as "the helm" of the publication until its closure.

The national security trial of media tycoon Jimmy Lai and three Apple Daily-linked companies entered its 149th day today, with national security judges beginning to hear closing submissions since yesterday.

Prosecutors said today that Lai exploited his columns, online program "Live Chat With Jimmy Lai," and foreign media interviews to advocate for sanctions and hostile actions against China after the National Security Law took effect.

This included pushing to incorporate non-trade clauses like human rights clauses into China's foreign trade negotiations—a strategy prosecutors argued aimed to interfere with China's internal affairs and damage its economic interests.

Judges questioned whether the court should determine appropriate topics for trade discussions, expressing uncertainty about clear boundaries.

Prosecutors maintained trade talks should focus on commercial matters, alleging Lai weaponized negotiations to advance political agendas.

The prosecution continued to cite testimony from former Apple Daily editorial writer Yeung Ching-kee, who turned prosecution witness against Lai, describing the newspaper's editorial freedom as "autonomy within a cage"—with Lai setting ideological boundaries while allowing limited discretion within his framework.

The prosecution also cited former Next Digital CEO Cheung Kim-hung as saying staff had "no choice" but to follow Lai's directives.

Despite Lai's December 2020 arrest and subsequent detention, prosecutors argued Lai retained control, instructing staff to continue operations until Apple Daily's June 2021 shutdown.

Notably, they emphasized Lai never issued formal post-NSL directives prohibiting illegal content, alleging the newspaper merely shifted tactics from overtly advocating sanctions to "skirting the edge" of legality.