Some not-very Yuletide reading

Eric Lai in the Diplomat…

…the Lai verdict reveals something … troubling: local courts are endorsing authorities engaged in information manipulation about Lai and Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement. The ruling represents more than just another conviction in a city where dissent is no longer tolerated. It is a capstone in the ongoing effort to rewrite the history of Hong Kong and its pro-democracy movement – using the once-respected courts as the final word in this narrative revision.

For years, China’s cognitive warfare against Hong Kong has operated on several fronts. First, it promotes the narrative that Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement was merely foreign interference. This is the “mastermind” theory, portraying activists as foreign proxies rather than citizens exercising collective political agency. Second, it advances political relativism, suggesting that Chinese authoritarian governance deserves equal respect as Western liberal democracies and that authoritarian regimes deserve leadership. Third, it insists that human rights must yield to nationalistic conceptions of regime security and that the international system does not necessarily promote the established human rights norms and practices set by the United Nations. 

…The Lai verdict represents … a new low [in courts’ involvement]. The Court of First Instance departed from political impartiality by adopting politicized language against Lai – and by extension, Hong Kong’s entire pro-democracy movement.

The verdict claims Lai’s trial is not a “trial for his political views and he is free to hold whatever views he likes on politics.” Yet its substance overwhelmingly associates his guilt with political speeches and actions. The opening paragraphs stigmatize Lai’s character with loaded language: his “rabid hatred of the CCP” (Chinese Communist Party), his “deep resentment,” his “obsession to change CCP’s values to those of the Western worlds and counterbalance China’s influence.” The court describes him as “poisoning the minds of his readers” through “venomous assertions” in the Apple Daily. The verdict traces Lai’s origins in Hong Kong – a story of displacement from mainland China shared by many Hong Kongers – to paint a picture of a man motivated by hatred rather than principle.

The 2019 pro-democracy movement – which at its height saw 2 million people take to the streets – is reduced to violence and chaos in the court verdict. The court portrays Lai as both the “mastermind” of the movement and a foreign proxy, reinforcing Beijing’s preferred narrative…

Most troubling is the verdict’s treatment of post-National Security Law conduct. The court acknowledges that after the law took effect, Lai made no explicit public requests for sanctions. Yet it concludes his “implicitly disguised and subtle approach” to communications still constituted collusion. This reasoning – finding criminality in the unspoken – approaches the Chinese concept of “誅心” (punishing thoughts), criminalizing intentions rather than acts that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This veers into thought crimes incompatible with freedom of conscience.

…The verdict’s release triggered an immediate government response. Within hours, official statements from various official agencies in Hong Kong and China cited the court’s findings to justify their usual narratives depicting Lai as a foreign agent, anti-China troublemaker, and a media mogul spreading misinformation. Calls for heavy punishment by government agencies were widely publicized – even before Lai could present his argument for mitigation. 

Most of these accusations stemmed from facts that predate the promulgation of the NSL, and the verdict says they serve only as “a background.” Nevertheless, these pre-NSL facts in the verdict now endorse state-led political narratives and discourse. This rapid adoption of propaganda, followed by counterattacks against foreign media, reveals how judicial decisions now serve as ammunition in a broader information war.

More on the Jimmy Lai verdict from Michael Kovrig…

In Time, author Gigi Leung’s memories of growing up in an HOS project.

A thread on ‘happy Christmas’ vs ‘merry Christmas’, starring Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell and Charles Dickens.