Attorney Teresa Chu, representing the plaintiffs, said that the main goal of their testimony on March 10 was to provide evidence on the existence and enforcement of the blacklist by Hong Kong’s government. She said that since the incident happened in April 2003, the Hong Kong government has yet to provide a reason for the refusal of entry.
She said, “If the Hong Kong government indeed, with a lack of candor, honesty, and appropriate procedures, destroyed evidence on why they refused our entry [back in 2003], then they will certainly lose this case. The court stated clearly that the Hong Kong government’s testimony on March 11 must be explicit about whether they met the threshold of ‘candor’ in answering questions.”
The judges questioned whether the Hong Kong government met the duty of candor in court. Judge Ma Tao-Li told the Hong Kong government’s legal counsel that if the government could not find a good cause, or completely lacked a reason to refuse entry by the plaintiffs, then the government would certainly lose the case.
Evidence presented by Ms. Zhu, includes testimony by Mr. Chen Yonglin, a former Chinese diplomat who defected to Australia in 2005, detailing the Chinese consulates’ compilation of “blacklists” of overseas Falun Gong practitioners; electronic mail from June 2007 from Taiwan Airlines showing Hong Kong Immigration’s request to block Falun Gong practitioners from entering Hong Kong; and new information on databases of Falun Gong and Taiwan citizens’ visits to China as a part of the Chinese regime’s “Golden Shield” project.
Ms. Zhu said that the plaintiffs will not give up investigating the Chinese regime’s crimes. The hearings at the High Court will last four days. The judge is expected to make a decision within one month.
Friends Read Free