Chinese Authorities Threaten to Make Hong Kong Protester Disappear

On July 1, 2019, Hong Kong protesters broke into the Legislative Council building. Many people were charged, some were charged with rioting. Profile photo Sung Pi-Lung /The Epoch Times

On July 1, 2019, some Hong Kong protesters broke into the Legislative Council building. Many people were charged with crimes, including rioting. The case resumed in the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court (Provisional District Court) on June 13, 2023.

One of the defendants, Lam Kam-kwan, who pleaded not guilty, disputed an involuntary confession. The defense pointed out that when Lam went to China to visit his relatives on Aug. 13, 2019, he was charged and arrested for “disorderly behavior.” He was detained in Shenzhen for about two months, during which the Hong Kong Police threatened Lam to confess soon, or he would remain in China. Lam was also threatened by the Chinese authorities that he would be made to “disappear” from the face of the earth.

During his detention in China, Lam was interrogated by the mainland authorities, and subjected to unfair treatment, including no rest for 14 hours.

When Lam was handed over to the Hong Kong Police, he received similar treatment: The police chief threatened Lam to cooperate, or the police would extradite him to China again.

The defense added that Lam was forced to write a letter of repentance, to admit having participated in the July 1 Legislative Council Incident, standing off with the police outside the Legislative Council, and passing supplies such as helmets and eye masks to other protesters.

In addition, Lam was asked to admit his wrongdoing and promise to serve his country to the best of his abilities.

The mainland Chinese authorities also warned Lam if he refused to cooperate, he would be made to “disappear” from the face of the earth and admonished that Lam must cooperate with the Hong Kong police.

The defense also pointed out that on Sept. 20, 2019, Hong Kong Police Chief Inspector Wan Kai-ming and two of his staff, Senior Inspector Yip Kim-pang and Detective Sergeant 2828, went to the detention center in Shenzhen to locate Lam.

Wan claimed Lam’s fingerprints were found on an iron shield inside the Legislative Council and forced Lam to confess.

“You only have one chance. No one can help you now. If you don’t admit your crime, you can continue to stay here and forget about returning to Hong Kong,” Wan added.

It was at that point Lam finally admitted he hit some glasses.

Confession Rehearsal

On Oct. 18, 2019, Lam was handed over and extradited to the Hong Kong Police at Futian Port, Shenzhen.

At the time, Detective Constable 11245 announced the warrant and arrested Lam.

Meanwhile, Detective Sergeant 2828 intimidated him; he must cooperate with the police if he did not want to be sent back to China again.

Detective Sergeant 2828 demanded Lam to recite his “confession,” which read, “On July 1, 2019, I did not enter and destroy the Legislative Council. I only hit some glass outside on the ground floor, after which I left.”

The defense mentioned that in the video interview conducted at the Central Police Station, the police requested Lam to add content using the original confession as a blueprint.

The content police asked Lam to add includes the following:

• Hitting the glass door of the Legislative Council with an iron barricade
• Touching an iron shield
• Denying legal assistance or contacting family after his arrest.

In addition, before Lam was taken to the Legislative Council for crime reconstruction, he expressed he was not feeling well and asked the police for medication. But the police denied medical help and said as soon as Lam finished with the reconstruction, he could get bail and have his arrest warrant removed from the court the following day.

When Lam arrived at the Legislative Council, he expressed he did not know where the glass door was. The police casually told him, “Just pointing at a random one will do.”

Police Deny Intimidating Arrestee

The court summoned Former Senior Inspector Yip Kim-pang, Chief Inspector Wan Kai-Ming, and Detective Constable 11245 Tsui Man-tat.

Yip said he was assigned to meet defendant Lam Kam-kwan in Shenzhen. Yip was aware of an arrest warrant for Lam at the time, but he did not initiate the setup or investigate the case. Yip argued that Hong Kong police had no law enforcement power.

Hence he only confirmed Lam’s identity.

On the other hand, Wan said he did not meet Lam on the same day.

During the defense cross-examination, both police officers denied having intimidated or sweet-talked Lam. They informed Lam he would be investigated upon his return to Hong Kong.

Detective Officer 11245 Tsui Man-tat, who arrested defendant Lam Kim-kwan, also denied any police asking Lam to tamper with his letter of repentance or add more story.

Case no.: DCCC606-610/2020、DCCC1069/2020、DCCC259/2021