For Australians accused of drug trafficking in China, Hong Kong can make a world of differenceAnthony Bannister escapes death sentence for now"They've used me as a mule"
Guangzhou: Chinese court officials have sought to silence news coverage of an Australian man facing life in jail who says he was duped into becoming an unwitting drug mule, barring journalists from observing his high court appeal hearing on Tuesday.
Former jockey Anthony Bannister has been in Chinese detention since   March 2014 when he was arrested while attempting to board his flight to Sydney at Guangzhou's international airport, after customs officials found commercial quantities of the drug ice stuffed in women's handbags in his luggage. In   June last year, the Adelaide man was handed a suspended death sentence, which is usually commuted to a life sentence after a period of good behaviour. 
But along with a string of similar cases involving Australians in Guangzhou and across the border in Hong Kong, the Adelaide man says he was tricked by a sophisticated drug syndicate who groomed him online, lured him to the southern metropolis on false pretences, and handed him a piece of luggage to bring back with him at the last minute. The string of similar cases prompted the Australian government to update its travel advisory to China in   September 2014 warning citizens not to agree to carry luggage on other people's behalf.
Fairfax Media was blocked from entering the Guangdong High Court for the hearing on Tuesday, despite applying for access in advance, and despite China's claims that its courtrooms are open and that its judicial processes are fair and transparent.
Guangdong High Court spokeswoman Yun Lizhen told Fairfax Media anyone was free to observe any case heard in Chinese courts but that she was "highly concerned" that we planned to report the court hearing before a judgement was handed down, which she said was against the law.
Pressed on what Chinese law or regulation this contravened, Ms Yun said this was an "internationally recognised standard".
"I even gave you the suggestion to just report after the judgement is handed down, you don't agree, so under these circumstances I won't allow you to observe the court case," she told Fairfax Media.
When pointed out there clearly was no such uniform international practice, and that even within China, high-profile, politically-sensitive cases like the corruption trial of Bo Xilai were allowed to be reported in real time before any judgement was handed down, Ms Yun said the exception was for cases which attracted "great public attention". She gave the recent example of wide press coverage of the trial of Takuma Sakuragi, a septuagenarian Japanese politician who is also charged with trafficking the drug ice, and who also says he was tricked into doing so.
"If it's something that the society is paying high attention to we will allow or even invite a wide range of media outlets to report in order to facilitate comprehensive reporting," she said. "But now it's just your one media outlet who has requested to observe the case."
As the conversation circled, it was clear the Guangdong court's main concern also highlighted the deep suspicion with which Chinese officialdom viewed foreign media outlets.
Repeatedly, Ms Yun said the fact that only one media outlet requested access to Bannister's trial proved the case did not warrant "wider social attention" and therefore raised questions over our motivations for wanting to report on it.
"I don't know what your motivation for reporting the case is, are you acting under the instructions of the accused?" Ms Yun said.
"How is that possible? We are professional journalists." I fired back, now genuinely affronted.
"You say that's not possible but you tell me: how can I believe you, sir?" she said.
Bannister's lawyer, Zou Jianhong, said his client's case should have been open for anyone to observe and that he had not previously heard of any of the legal restrictions described by Ms Yun. 
Experienced criminal lawyer Chen Yong said the courtroom should have been open given the case did not involve state or commercial secrets. 
Media regulations and provisions stipulated on the Supreme People's Court website state: "the people's courts shall establish and improve rules of orderly opening and effective management for observing and reporting court trials, and eliminate the obstacles to the access to information and supervision by the public and the media".
With Sanghee Liu