Mind your tone of voice

Samuel Bickett introduces his testimony to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China…

With the majority of foreign attention focused on the National Security Law, my number one priority was to draw attention to abuses taking place outside of NSL cases due to rampant, open misconduct in court by judges, magistrates, prosecutors and police officers. After all, the vast majority of political prisoners in Hong Kong are charged under common law crimes like unlawful assembly, riot, and “weapons” possession (usually laser pointers)—not the NSL. Since these laws were not designed to be used in this way, it has required a great deal of manipulation and outright misconduct by civil servants to ensure convictions…

The agenda of the hearings links to testimony from other witnesses – Patrick Poon, Fermi Wong and Ching Cheong, and to a video of the session.

The Commission’s research note names Justice Dept personnel and outlines possible sanctions against them.

The Hong Kong government’s response is predictably over-sensitive and over-wrought, saying the US…

…once again, manifests its hegemonism by disseminating slanders and attempting to intimidate the prosecutors of the HKSAR Government.

…The spokesperson rebuked that it is most despicable for the so-called “staff research report” to name the Secretary for Justice, together with 15 prosecutors, of the HKSAR Government with a threat of imposing the so-called “sanction” on them. This is clearly trampling on legal justice and attempting to threaten by way of hegemonism [you’ve said that already] the HKSAR Government officials who have been discharging their due prosecution role dutifully with justice upheld. Such gross interference in Hong Kong matters constitutes a serious violation of fundamental principles of international law.

The spokesperson said, “The attempt of the United States Congressional-Executive Commission on China to repeat a lie numerous times as if it were a truth simply reflects its ill intent and amounts to nothing more than an indecent act”.

Phew. Samuel Bickett points out

It hits a nerve because of how effectively the sanctions would deter misconduct. They can control fallout w/ senior officials, but not lower ranks.

Not sure if it would deter misconduct so much as deter being a Justice Dept employee. No mention of the even bigger step of putting sanctions on judges.

Justice Secretary Paul Lam defends the ‘incitement of hatred/enmity stuff in a Sing Tao interview…’

As for any confusion arising from terms such as “hatred-triggering,” “dissatisfaction” and “enmity,” Lam said they should not be considered without context and that various factors, from the background of a case to the accused person’s tone of voice, would be taken into account.

By ‘tone of voice’, does he mean the government reserves the right to read your mind and decide what you really meant? 

Meanwhile, a Hong Kong government delegation attended (by video link) a UN human rights committee’s meeting, answering – or not answering – questions on political, labour, academic and other freedoms. Asked if Hong Kong NGOs could be assured that they wouldn’t be persecuted for communicating with the UN, the delegates said – well, guess.

Sadly, all the government’s hard PR work is promptly undermined by more harsh sentences. Koo Sze-yiu goes international, in the BBC and AFP, among others. Soon to be joined by Grandma Wong, age 66, sentenced to eight months for – nothing, really.

The Chow Hang-tung case gets into legal technicalities. An explanation.

On a separate note, this just in from our Wimbledon correspondent: one Victor Gao says tennis player Peng Shuai is ‘too tall to have been sexually assaulted’.

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Mind your tone of voice

  1. Chinese Netizen says:

    “The spokesperson rebuked that it is most despicable for the so-called “staff research report” to name the Secretary for Justice, together with 15 prosecutors, of the HKSAR Government with a threat of imposing the so-called “sanction” on them.”

    So it is.

  2. Frances Gumm says:

    Individual sanctions that do not extend to all of the targeted individual’s immediate family members, including spouse, children, parents and siblings, are meaningless.

    That individual sanctions do not ensnare close relatives demonstrates that the sanctions are little more than empty, virtue-signalling gestures, rather than serious policy actions of a peaceful nature intended to deter or modify objectionable behaviour.

    They’d rather go to war than fix the problem.

  3. Red Dragon says:

    Victor Gao, eh?

    His surname is a bit of a minefield. The slightest tonal slip might render it as nine, cock, or dog.

    Crikey!

  4. Knownot says:

    “does he mean the government reserves the right to read your mind and decide what you really meant? ”

    Yes.

    This is from the Standard yesterday, July 13:

    “Deputy district judge Cheng Lim-chi said former Eastern council member Lancelot Chan Wing-tai, 58, implicitly called on people to join an illegal assembly”

    “Implicitly”. Chan was imprisoned for 15 months.

  5. Knownot says:

    “one Victor Gao says tennis player Peng Shuai is ‘too tall to have been sexually assaulted’.”

    I have read what I think is Peng’s authentic statement. I think that sexual assault involves the use of force. If so, she certainly does not claim to have been sexually assaulted. Her complaint is that he persuaded, pressured her.

  6. wmjp says:

    “Deputy district judge Cheng Lim-chi said former Eastern council member Lancelot Chan Wing-tai, 58, implicitly called on people to join an illegal assembly”

    The judge thereby explicitly interprets fact to suit himself (which is the role of a jury in normal trials) rather than the law.

    More and more frequently I am wondering if insecurity judges, prosecutors and government “spokespeons” (not a typo) ever had a working brain or if they discarded it as a condition of employment.

  7. Mark Bradley says:

    “More and more frequently I am wondering if insecurity judges, prosecutors and government “spokespeons” (not a typo) ever had a working brain or if they discarded it as a condition of employment.”

    Which is why all of these fucking cunts need to be sanctioned. I too am annoyed that these US sanctions don’t extend to family….though if I recall if there is evidence of a family member helping a sanctioned family member avoid sanctions, they will be subject to secondary sanctions.

  8. Tale of two Talls too tall says:

    @Knownot
    Indeed it’s not really worth even dismissing his dimwitted excuse — one might as well claim that Bo Xilai, at 1.82m, is too tall to ever have been arrested: it’s a total red herring.
    The only thing that’s actually “too tall” here is Gao’s tale.
    All the more ironic (or moronic for short), given his family name, “Gao”, literally means “Tall”.
    And, what better proof that she did get assaulted by Zhang Gaoli (yes, that Gao is literally “tall” as well), than the fact that the best evidence the CCP can come up with that it never happened is ‘she’s quite tall and fit’ and he’s a bit old.

  9. KwunTongBypass says:

    Maybe Gao has wet dreams about being wrestled to the ground by Peng Shuai.

  10. Chinese Netizen says:

    “And, what better proof that she did get assaulted by Zhang Gaoli (yes, that Gao is literally “tall” as well), than the fact that the best evidence the CCP can come up with that it never happened is ‘she’s quite tall and fit’ and he’s a bit old.”

    That’s the TCM of worn out excuses regularly dragged out in the mainland.
    And even as “Me Too” is being broken apart in the west and perpetrators of intimidation/sexual coercion through positions of power and influence, not necessarily physical strength, are getting their second acts (minus Harvey Weinstein), the CCP and general Chinese cultural “thinking” is doing it’s best to reiterate that sexual predation/intimidation just doesn’t exist in their Utopia.
    Nothing to see here, folks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.