SA court says covert recordings allege Adelaide City councillor Jing Li sought Chinese Consul-General’s aid winning 2022 election

A winning candidate in Adelaide council’s contentious 2022 poll was allegedly recorded saying he’d contacted the Chinese for aid in getting him elected, a court has heard.

Adelaide City councillor Jing Li has repeatedly denied accusations of wrongdoing in the lead-up to last year’s election. Picture: Dean Martin

Adelaide City council candidate Jing Li told his associates he “had contacted the Chinese Consul-General” for help winning the 2022 election, a court has heard.

This week, the Supreme Court granted former councillor Alexander Hyde access to two of three “covert recordings” that allegedly capture Mr Li and his allies discussing the election.

In his judgment, Justice Adam Kimber said he was satisfied the persons who made those two recordings had done so “in the public interest” of ensuring the integrity of the election.

However, he denied Mr Hyde access to a recording made, in May 2022, by a man named Colin Ma.

Justice Kimber detailed that recording in his judgment, saying Mr Ma had claimed to have been invited, by Mr Li’s associates, to meet with the candidate to discuss the election.

“In his statement, Mr Ma says ‘Jing Li told us his plans to obtain people’s support for the election’,” Justice Kimber said.

“He says Mr Li ‘said he knew people … who owned or operated apartment buildings in the city and knew a lot of information about Chinese students.

“He says ‘Jing Li also told us that he had contacted the Chinese Consul-General in Adelaide for his support but the Consul-General did not think he could do this at this time.”

On Tuesday, the Court of Disputed Returns will hear Mr Hyde’s petition to overturn his loss in last November’s election.

He had claimed the tapes, held by the Electoral Commission, were crucial to his case.

Former councillor Alexander Hyde is seeking to overturn the election result. Picture: Matt Turner.

He has further claimed Mr Li and his associates engaged in “illegal practices” resulting in “illegitimate votes” – accusations that Mr Li has repeatedly denied.

Mr Hyde’s bid for the tapes was opposed by Mr Li and supported by councillor Simon Hou whose wife, the court heard, had made one of the recordings.

In his judgment, Justice Kimber said he was satisfied the recording made by Mr Hou’s wife had been generated “in the public interest”.

He said a second recording made by Mr Ma, of discussions at the home of one of Mr Li’s associates, also met that criteria.

In that recording, he said, the associate said Mr Li had “promised” his support if elected and “thought he could get the SA Premier and chief of police to attend” business openings.

The associate, he said, was also recorded saying Mr Li “had signed” 10 ballot papers “on behalf of the voters”.

Justice Kimber said that, because each recording met the legal criteria for “public interest”, they should be released to Mr Hyde.

The other recording made by Mr Ma, he said, did not meet that criteria.

“The admissible evidence does not establish who made the recording (nor) why it was made, the date or the participants,” he said.

He ordered the Electoral Commission release two of the recordings to Mr Hyde – and also to Mr Li – ahead of the petition.

However, he said whether or not the recordings were admissible evidence in that petition was a matter for the Court of Disputed Returns.