Thinking about Hong Kong's political prisoners, and Glory to Hong Kong, on Midwinter Solstice

Sesame-filled glutinous rice balls in ginger sauce -- a dish

I ate last night but can imagine many people opting to eat tonight :)
 

It's the Winter (or Midwinter) Solstice today -- and many people are celebrating it with family and loved ones; with some shops closing earlier than usual to allow staff to do so and some restaurants not offering dinner service to enable their staff to have the evening off.  Which is why, I guess, my thoughts turn to the Hong Kongers in exile who are not able to do the same -- and, also, Hong Kong's political prisoners, of which there really are far too many for comfort; and with their numbers increased this week too.

 

Jimmy Lai was the Hong Kong political prisoner who dominated the news today -- thanks to the judges presiding over his national security law trial having upheld a sedition charge against him today following the defence’s argument that the charge was laid after a six-month statute of limitations had expired.  Sad but true: this was not exactly unexpected.  

 

As Samuel Bickett, who has had first hand experience of the brand of "justice" dished out by Esther Toh, one of the three judges presiding over Jimmy Lai's national security law trial, Tweeted: "In case anyone still had doubts—this is a pretty clear indicator of how the next few months of Jimmy Lai’s trial are going to go for the defense."  That is, there's not much that's going to be allowed to go the defence's way.

 

Jimmy Lai, for those who didn't realize, has now spent over 1,000 days behind bars -- the majority (if not all) in solitary confinement.   Another reminder: "Prolonged solitary confinement is a form of torture (according to the UN Mandela Rules)".  And yet that is what the former media mogul has been subjected to by the authorities here in Hong Kong.

 

Another Hong Kong political prisoner currently in solitary confinement is lawyer-activist Chow Hang-tung.  Incredibly, the apparent reason for her latest spell in isolation is that she had received "too many letters".  Yesterday also saw her latest application for bail ahead of her national security law trial being denied, with the judge saying that it's because it can't be guaranteed that she won't be a national security threat.  

 

A reminder: this is the Chow Hang-tung who's a Nobel Peace Prize nominee and recently awarded a human rights prize by the foreign ministries of France and Germany that "honours“civil society’s commitment to human dignity and the inalienable human rights of all people”". What kind of government would consider her a national security threat? I leave you to be the judge on that.

Yesterday also saw the addition of (at least) one more name to the shocking lengthy list of Hong Kong political prisoners. Marilyn Tang, the sister-in-law of jailed activist Lee Cheuk-yan, was given six months in prison for ‘perverting the course of justice’ after she pleaded guilty to removing electronic devices from her sister, Elizabeth Tang’s home following Lee Cheuk-yan's wife's arrest this past March under the Beijing-imposed national security law.

 

Here's the thing: Marilyn Tang did admit to having visited Elizabeth Tang's apartment and removed her sister’s phone and laptop, which was potential evidence. But the fact of the matter is that the police later found no evidence she had tampered with the devices, nor found anything incriminating on them. Yet she's been sent to prison -- for SIX MONTHS -- nonetheless!

Meanwhile, it feels like Hong Kong dodged a bullet earlier this week -- or, rather, to mix metaphors, kicked it a couple of months down the road to February 24th. I'm referring here to the Hong Kong government's appeal against a lower court's rejection of its proposed Glory to Hong Kong injunction that seeks to ban the dissemination of the 2019 protest anthem online, including via Youtube videos.

 

On Tuesday, the Appeals Court judges hearing the appeal decided they would need more time to hear the government’s arguments rather than make a judgement about it. From what was heard though, here's the government's case for the injunction in a nutshell appears to be that the song "amounted to a “weapon” for people to threaten the authorities".

 

Think about this for a minute (or more): this is a SONG we are talking about. But, then, the Hong Kong government has previous with regards to thinking that things most rational, sane people don't consider to be weapons to be so. Remember their saying this about umbrellas (starting from as far back as 2014)?  Also, remember the case of the female protestor arrested and convicted of assaulting a police officer with HER BREASTS?!

 

Back to the Glory to Hong Kong case: here's a reminder that the injunction application was rejected by High Court judge Anthony Chan in July   On Tuesday, "Acting as “a friend of the court” – someone who is not involved in a legal case, but who assists a court by offering information or insight – Senior Counsel Abraham Chan described the injunction pursued by the government as “unprecedented" and pointed out that "the song itself was not illegal, and there was no evidence that an injunction would help internet service providers remove the song if the publisher’s intent was unclear".  

 

"Chan also asked the court to consider provisions in the security law which stipulate that human rights and freedom must be protected."  One can but hope against hope that it does. And consequently reject the government's appeal come February 24th. Otherwise, I fear that yet another level of Pandora's Box will be opened; one that will lead to Youtube (and its parent company, Google) deciding to stop its services in Hong Kong -- something which it did in Mainland China years ago -- and, in the process, make it even more difficult for people here to stay connected to friends and family members living elsewhere in the world.