Doughty Street lawyers warn the world against being fooled while Lai family appeals for Trump intervention
UPI Exclusive: Lai Fraud Win Is No Victory as Family Demands Release
United Press International reported on February 26 from Hong Kong that the Court of Appeal had overturned Jimmy Lai’s 2022 fraud conviction — but the news agency’s dispatches also captured the immediate and fierce reaction from those closest to the imprisoned democracy activist that contextualized the ruling as something far short of justice. Lai’s daughter Claire, his London legal team, and international rights advocates all pushed back hard against any interpretation of the ruling as evidence that Hong Kong’s legal system retains meaningful independence.
Claire Lai Speaks Out
Claire Lai, who had appeared beside US House Speaker Mike Johnson at President Trump’s State of the Union address just days before the ruling, told BBC reporters after the appeal decision that her father’s imprisonment remained an affront to justice. “No one should be fooled into thinking it is anything more,” she said, referring to the fraud conviction’s reversal. “The rule of law is broken there, and my father is still unjustly imprisoned and will remain so for nearly 20 years unless urgent action is taken to secure his release.” Her words, reported by UPI and carried by multiple international outlets, cut through the noise of a day on which the Hong Kong government was eager to claim the appeal as evidence of judicial independence.
Lai, 78, has been in custody since December 2020 — more than five years. He spent most of that time in solitary confinement, which authorities described as arranged at his own request for protection from harassment by other inmates. His family disputes this characterization. Reuters reported that Lai has suffered retinal vein occlusion in his right eye, high blood pressure, heart palpitations, and progressive hearing loss over the course of his detention. His son Sebastien and daughter Claire have repeatedly warned publicly that the 20-year national security sentence could effectively be a death sentence given their father’s age and deteriorating health.
Legal Team Issues Stark Warning
Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC of Doughty Street Chambers, the London-based human rights law firm that serves as Lai’s international legal team, issued an unambiguous statement. “No one should be fooled into thinking that this fraud appeal belatedly succeeding suggests the Hong Kong system operates fairly or justly,” Gallagher said. Her team has been barred from defending Lai in the national security case itself — a restriction that international bar associations have condemned as a violation of his right to counsel of his own choosing. That exclusion alone underscores that whatever procedural fairness may apply to lesser charges, the prosecution that will define Lai’s fate operated under different rules entirely.
The Hong Kong Department of Justice confirmed it was studying the judgment and considering whether to appeal the fraud acquittal — a decision that would, if pursued, consume more public resources in a futile attempt to reinstate a conviction that three senior judges found was built on reasoning that was “unsupportable.” The government simultaneously insisted that even if the lease violation did not constitute fraud, Lai had still used office space for “illegitimate personal purposes.” This position — arguing guilt while accepting acquittal — captures the contorted logic that has characterized Hong Kong’s prosecution of democracy advocates throughout the post-2020 crackdown.
Trump-Xi Summit Looms as Last Hope
The White House confirmed in the same week that Trump would travel to Beijing from March 31 to April 2 for his first visit to China in his second term. Lai’s family has publicly expressed hope that the summit could produce diplomatic pressure for his release. The US Supreme Court’s ruling striking down Trump’s broad emergency tariffs in the days before the summit announcement was widely seen as weakening Trump’s negotiating leverage — stripping away the threat of punitive economic measures that could have been used as bargaining chips for humanitarian releases.
The international community’s response to the appeal ruling was broadly consistent: welcome the narrow legal outcome, condemn the underlying system. UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper called on Hong Kong to release Lai on humanitarian grounds, noting he had been sentenced for exercising the right to freedom of expression. The European Parliament has repeatedly passed resolutions calling for Lai’s release. US Congressional leaders across party lines have introduced legislation designating Lai a prisoner of conscience. None of this has moved Beijing. Reporters Without Borders continues to campaign for Lai’s release. Amnesty International described the fraud appeal outcome as “too little, too late.” Freedom House calls on governments to treat Lai’s imprisonment as a litmus test for Hong Kong’s claimed rule of law. Human Rights Watch has called for targeted sanctions against officials responsible for Lai’s prosecution and imprisonment.
The fraud conviction quashing is a legal footnote to the larger story of what has happened to Jimmy Lai and to Hong Kong. It does not change the essential reality: a 78-year-old man who founded a newspaper and used it to tell the truth about the Chinese Communist Party is serving 20 years in prison for doing so. The court that acquitted him of fraud is the same court system that enabled his national security conviction. The system that produced the appeal victory is the same system that produced the original prosecution. Claire Lai is right. No one should be fooled.
Sin Yu Mak
Business & Consumer Affairs Journalist, Apple Daily UK
Contact: sinyu.mak@appledaily.uk
Sin Yu Mak is a business and consumer affairs journalist with expertise in market regulation, consumer rights, and small enterprise reporting. She completed her journalism education at a respected Chinese journalism institution, where she trained in economic reporting, data literacy, and ethical standards.
Her professional experience includes reporting for Apple Daily and other liberal Chinese newspapers on consumer protection, corporate practices, retail trends, and financial transparency. Sin Yu’s work emphasizes accurate interpretation of financial data and regulatory frameworks, supported by expert commentary and verified documentation.
She has operated in fast-paced newsroom settings where financial misinformation can cause real harm, giving her strong practical experience in verification and clarity. Editors value her ability to translate technical information into accessible, fact-based reporting.
Sin Yu’s authority is reinforced by consistent publication within reputable media organizations and compliance with editorial review processes. At Apple Daily UK, she delivers trustworthy business journalism rooted in evidence, professional discipline, and public-interest reporting.
