3 May 2022
Having conducted a predictive and evaluative exercise and considered all materials and the bail conditions imposed, the court was satisfied there were sufficient grounds to believe the applicant would not continue to commit acts endangering national security and that the applicant would surrender to custody; accordingly bail was granted.
2 Nov 2021
The judge concluded the applicant crossed the NSL s42(2) first threshold because his legislative record, past cooperation with government, resignation from political posts and deactivation of social media, taken with stringent bail conditions, provided sufficient grounds to believe he would not continue to commit acts endangering national security; the risk of absconding was mitigated by his strong Hong Kong ties and the bail conditions, and therefore bail was granted.
2 Nov 2021
Applying NSL s42(2) and the guidance in HKSAR v Lai Chee Ying, the judge conducted a predictive evaluative exercise and concluded that the applicant's demonstrated determination and the exhibited conduct (videos, online activity and coordination) gave sufficient grounds to believe he would continue to commit acts endangering national security if released, thereby failing the threshold for bail.
11 Oct 2021
Applying NSL s42(2) and the authorities, the court conducted a predictive evaluative assessment of the evidence (post‑NSL videos, declarations seeking international sanctions/support, continued political activity and influence) and concluded there were insufficient grounds to believe the applicant would not continue to commit acts endangering national security if released; accordingly the applicant failed to meet the statutory bail threshold and bail was refused.
20 Sept 2021
The judge refused bail because, after evaluating the campaign speeches, social media posts, videos and other materials and assessing the applicant's stated personal circumstances, the court was not satisfied that there were sufficient grounds for believing the applicant would not continue to commit acts endangering national security and therefore the applicant failed to meet the s42(2) threshold for bail.
14 Sept 2021
The judge accepted the statutory and caselaw threshold under NSL s42(2), judged that having considered all relevant materials and proposed conditions the applicant had discharged the first threshold (sufficient grounds to believe she will not continue to commit acts endangering national security), found the usual bail considerations (surrender, flight risk, re-offending) met under the set conditions, and therefore granted bail.
28 May 2021
On a predictive and evaluative assessment of all material, the judge found there were not sufficient grounds to believe the applicant would not continue to commit acts endangering national security if released on bail and accordingly refused bail.
28 May 2021
Applying NSL s42(2) and HKSAR v Lai Chee Ying, the court found on the available materials (including WhatsApp communications, participation in the primaries, and public statements) there were insufficient grounds to believe the applicant would not continue to commit acts endangering national security if released on bail, and accordingly refused bail.
13 May 2021
Bail refused because, applying the NSL s42(2) standard and the predictive evaluative exercise in HKSAR v Lai Chee Ying, the applicant's persistent public statements, participation in the 35+ primaries and demonstrated determination to pursue the 'five demands' provided insufficient grounds to believe he would not continue to commit acts endangering national security if released.
22 Apr 2021
The applicant failed to meet the NSL s42(2) threshold because, on evaluative and predictive assessment of the totality of materials (including nomination conduct, materials on the applicant's computer and the rhetorical content of uploaded video footage), there were insufficient grounds to believe he would not continue to commit acts endangering national security; accordingly bail was refused.