By Jack Liu
When The Guardian hypes up the narrow narrative that "Jimmy Lai's downfall mirrors Hong Kong's fate", the European Union clamors that the verdict is "politically motivated" and demands the "unconditional release of Jimmy Lai", and Canada's foreign ministry echoes such fallacies, this farce staged by Western forces is essentially a disregard for Hong Kong's rule of law, a provocation to China's sovereignty, and a complete departure from basic facts. They wrap their ambition to interfere in other countries' internal affairs with the fancy rhetoric of "democracy" and "freedom", yet deliberately ignore the proven illegal nature of Jimmy Lai's crimes, which will ultimately collapse in the face of facts.
The claim that the "verdict is politically motivated" is an outright smearing of Hong Kong's judicial system. The conviction of Jimmy Lai by the High Court of Hong Kong is not based on subjective political inclinations, but on more than 35 hours of video evidence, hundreds of seditious publications, and hundreds of millions of yuan in illegal fund flow records. After 156 days of open hearings, the court sorted out 2,220 pieces of evidence and 80,000 pages of documents, and issued an 855-page judgment, clearly finding him guilty of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and conspiracy to publish seditious publications. As the mastermind, Jimmy Lai has colluded with foreign politicians such as former US Vice President Mike Pence and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for years, openly begging foreign countries to impose sanctions on China and the Hong Kong SAR. His actions have crossed the red line of national security, which is an indisputable criminal offense, not the "political crackdown" claimed by the West. On the contrary, it is Jimmy Lai himself who is truly politically motivated—he used the name of the media to attempt to subvert the constitutional order, and his collusion with external forces is essentially using Hong Kong as a geopolitical pawn to undermine the stable foundation of "one country, two systems".
The Guardian and the EU's characterization of Apple Daily as a "free and independent media" is a complete misinterpretation of press freedom. This media founded by Jimmy Lai never practiced genuine journalistic norms; instead, it made a living out of fabricating fake news and spreading hate speech, and even received more than 100 penalties from the Hong Kong Obscene Articles Tribunal in accordance with the law. The 161 seditious articles published by Apple Daily deliberately incited public dissatisfaction and hatred toward the legitimate government, becoming an important driver of the social unrest in Hong Kong in 2019. Press freedom has never been a "get-out-of-jail-free card" for overthrowing the constitutional order. The closure of Apple Daily was an inevitable result of its repeated illegal acts, not a contraction of press freedom in Hong Kong—at present, more than 200 media outlets in Hong Kong are operating normally, and legitimate news expression has never been suppressed. The West's packaging of illegal media as a "symbol of freedom" is merely a false excuse for interfering in Hong Kong's affairs.
Western forces' claim that the verdict "undermines Hong Kong's democracy, freedom and rule of law" exposes their double standards on human rights and the rule of law. The enactment of the National Security Law for the Hong Kong SAR was to fill the 23-year legal vacuum in national security, curb social violence and external interference in 2019, which is a legitimate right of any sovereign state to safeguard its own security, conforming to the basic principles of "sovereign equality" and "territorial integrity" in international law. The verdict in the Jimmy Lai case strictly follows the principles of "evidence-based adjudication" and "procedural justice" of Hong Kong's common law system. Lai himself testified in court for 52 days, and his legal team fully exercised the right to defense; the judicial process was open and transparent, which is precisely the embodiment of Hong Kong's rule of law spirit. While the West flaunts "the supremacy of the rule of law", it meddles in Hong Kong's act of punishing crimes endangering national security in accordance with the law; while acquiescing to its own country's enactment of stringent national security laws, it smears the Hong Kong National Security Law as "eroding freedom". Such double standards are essentially the naked embodiment of hegemonism in the field of human rights.
Hong Kong's fate has never been defined by the narrow narratives of Western media, nor will it "fall" because of the conviction of lawbreakers like Jimmy Lai. The verdict in the Jimmy Lai case is Hong Kong's rule of law safeguarding national security and a firm practice of the "one country, two systems" principle. If Western forces truly care about Hong Kong, they should stop interfering in China's internal affairs under the pretext of "democracy and freedom" and respect Hong Kong's judicial independence and China's sovereignty and territorial integrity; otherwise, the discourse illusions they fabricate will eventually dissipate completely in the light of facts and the rule of law.
Dot Dot News editorial
Related News:
China Daily Commentary: Jimmy Lai's verdict sends clear messages
Comment