Page:HKSAR v. Tong Ying Kit (Verdict).pdf/48

-48- between the approach of Professor Lau on the one hand and the approach of the Defence Experts on the other.

139. In coming to this view, we take into account that the Defence Experts have never disputed that the Slogan is capable of bearing a secessionist meaning:
 * (1) At paragraph 61 of the Defence Expert Report, the Defence Experts accept it is undeniable that in his campaign speeches on 20 February 2016, Leung spoke in favour of Hong Kong’s political independence.
 * (2) Under cross-examination, Professor Eliza W Y Lee agreed that the Slogan put forward by Leung would, to some people, carry the meaning stated at paragraph 36 of Professor Lau’s report, namely inter alia, “the subject words were clearly put forward for the objective of advocating one or more political agendas [of Leung]; such political agendas in turn have the advocacy of Hong Kong independence and secession as their main content.”
 * (3) At paragraph 114 of the Defence Expert Report, the Defence Experts expressly accept that “Hong Kong Independence” is one of the ideas that may be associated with the Slogan.
 * (4) In her examination-in-chief, Professor Eliza W Y Lee fairly accepted that regarding the compound word “光