However much Western apologists have been whitewashing the criminal case of Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, founder of Next Media, they cannot hide the fact that the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region ruled that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt all elements of the charges against Lai, including conspiracy to collude with external forces to endanger national security under the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law, and conspiracy to publish seditious material under the Crimes Ordinance.

A guilty conscience needs no accuser. The only way to avoid facing legal punishment is to comply with the law absolutely. For those who have breached the law, even the most expensive legal defense team or the support of the greatest foreign government cannot help them escape facing the legal consequences of committing the crime.

Hong Kong courts emphasize procedural justice, among others. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution. It is not necessary for the defense to adduce any evidence to prove innocence. The whole trial of Lai’s case lasted for two years with hearings held on 156 days. Lai elected to give evidence, which only concluded after he had been in the witness box for 52 days.

READ MORE: Convicted mogul Jimmy Lai begins four-day mitigation

Lai’s case fully supports the fact that for the sake of justice, the Hong Kong courts will give ample and sufficient time for the defense to present its case at trial, for instance, to cross-examine prosecution witnesses; to adduce the evidence to be relied upon by the defense; to convince the court that the defendant should not be convicted at the stage of closing submissions; to explain to the court what kinds of reasonable doubts exist in the prosecution’s case; and to argue why the defendant should be acquitted in view of the weaknesses in the prosecution evidence. Finally, the presiding judge(s) will render a ruling with impartiality, fairness, and integrity without fear or favor. Notably, the presiding judge(s) will then prepare detailed reasoning for the judgment which clearly explains the rationale behind the court’s decision to both the prosecution and the defense. Either party has the right to appeal to a court at a higher level, if it feels dissatisfied with the verdict.

Hong Kong’s legal system enjoys a high reputation in the international community for its transparency, professionalism and independence of judicature, as evidenced by the city’s consistent high ranking in the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index. Attempts to smear Hong Kong’s judicial system or to attack its rule of law with various fallacies are invariably driven by political agendas; they will ultimately fail because they cannot deceive the international community. Facts speak louder than rhetoric.

It has also been proved that Hong Kong judges do not fear foreign sanctions. Under all circumstances, the judges’ rulings and decisions will never be affected, no matter what kind of foreign pressure has been imposed on them. Indeed, Hong Kong judges are of the highest quality and will never succumb to external pressure or intimidation.

READ MORE: Judgment in Jimmy Lai’s case upholds rule of law

Lai’s convictions serve as a stark warning to the lawbreakers: The long arm of the law will eventually catch up with you.

The author is a barrister-at-law and a Guangdong-Hong Kong Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.