The founder of Next Digital and Apple Daily filed a second legal challenge earlier this month in a bid to bar police from inspecting the digital content stored in his two iPhones, which police obtained from his mansion on Kadoorie Avenue on the same day as the raid. He contended that some content was related to news reporting and therefore subject to privilege.

The judicial review application stemmed from a search warrant, endorsed by Principal Magistrate Peter Law Tak-chuen last month, through which officers can access Lai’s mobile phones but subject to the order of the High Court, which has instructed police to seal the devices until further notice.

Lai’s lawyers argued the warrant was invalid as the new legislation did not expressly allow law enforcement to seize journalistic materials as evidence. The only legal way to do so, they said, was to apply for permission in the High Court instead of the magistracy in accordance with local legislation.

Mr Justice Wilson Chan Ka-shun, however, found that contention “plainly objectionable”, as that would mean the national security law and its implementation rules deprived the court of its power to order the seizure or production of certain evidence.

Chan said the protection of journalistic material was not absolute and should be compromised in light of “paramount” public interest, adding that the confidentiality of informants was not a privilege recognised by the law.

“Press freedom simply does not equate [to] any blanket prohibition against the seizure, production or disclosure of [journalistic materials],” Chan wrote in his 37-page judgment.

Even assuming the new regime offered no viable procedure for handling journalistic articles, the national security legislation should prevail whenever it appeared inconsistent with local laws, to the effect that police could seize “anything” likely to contain evidence of a national security offence, Chan said.

What happened at Apple Daily, and what does future hold for Jimmy Lai’s paper?

He also found no evidence to suggest the magistrate did not consider the competing interests underlying the search of journalistic material when he issued the warrant.

“The intended judicial review by the plaintiff is bound to fail and leave should accordingly be refused,” the judge concluded, before allowing police to access Lai’s mobile phones.

Lai will go on trial in December before three judges for allegedly colluding with foreign forces. Secretary for Justice Paul Lam Ting-kwok has ordered that the trial, expected to last 30 days, proceed without a jury on grounds including “involvement of foreign factors” and protection of jurors.

Currently serving a 20-month sentence at the maximum-security Stanley Prison for his role in four unauthorised assemblies, Lai will return to the District Court in late October to hear the verdict on his fraud trial, which concerns the use of the Apple Daily offices.