Thank you. I think there are four main reasons why the trial is not credible. The first is that Mr. Lai was, as you mentioned, denied his original choice of legal counsel.
Secondly, the judges, as in all national security trials, are hand-picked by the government and are known to be judges who will take a pro-government line.
Thirdly, as I mentioned, much of the witness testimony is questionable. There is one particular witness, due to appear soon, whom the United Nations has said has been tortured.
Fourthly, if you look at the evidence that the prosecution is putting forth, you will see that they're citing what, in Canada, in the United Kingdom and in any free society, would be perfectly normal day-to-day activities. The idea that a WhatsApp message from Jimmy Lai to me, asking me to ask Chris Patten to make a comment to a journalist—that idea—is admissible evidence of a crime is absurd.
The prosecution is presenting a case that is just not credible.