They Shot the Piano Player compares favourably to a number of Oscar-winning works! (Film review)

 

My life in Hong Kong: film festing, and way too ubiquitous 

police presence (See the police van on the 

other side of the road from the HKIFF advertising?) :S

They Shot the Piano Player (Spain-France-The Netherlands-Portugal-Peru-U.K., 2023)

- Fernando Treuba (who's also wrote the script) and Javier Mariscal, directors

- Voice actors: Jeff Goldblum, Tony Ramos, Abel Ayala, Roberta Wallach

- Part of the Hong Kong International Film Fetival's Animation Unlimited program 

 

The last animated movie I viewed prior to viewing this multinational offering was Hayao Miyazaki's The Boy and the Heron (Japan, 2023).  I realise it's unfair to compare these two very different cinematic offerings -- but if I did so, I'd say that I actually liked They Shot the Piano Player better, and am surprised that it didn't even get nominated for the Animated Feature Film Oscar that the Studio Ghibli production won this year.

 

Speaking of Oscar nominated animated works: Persepolis (France-U.S., 2007) is one of three works I got to thinking of when viewing They Shot the Piano Player; with the other two being the non-animated Academy Award winners Searching for Sugar Man (2012) and Missing (1982).  For like Vincent Paronnaud and Marjane Satrapi's work about a girl growing up in Islamic Revolution-era Iran, this offering from Fernando Teruba and Javier Mariscal is an animated docudrama -- in the latter case, about an American journalist trying to figure out what happened to a musical hero who appeared to have vanished into thin air, a la Searching the Sugar Man's Sixto Rodriguez, in a foreign, South American country similar to the fictional one that's the setting for Costa-Gavras' Missing.

 

It's 2010 and New York music journalist Jeff Harris (voiced by Jeff Goldblum) is planning on writing a book about the Brazilian bossa nova craze of the 1960s.  Early on in his research, he comes across a recording featuring the piano playing of Francisco Tenório Júnior and determines to learn more about this Brazilian musical talent.  

 

On research trips to Brazil, Jeff interviews illustrious Brazilian bossa nova musicians like Gilberto Gil, João Donato and Chico Buarque (voicing themselves in the movie) about their music, and memories of Tenório Júnior.  At some point, he changes the subject of his planned book to the piano player whose music, life and mysterious disappearance back in 1976 he has become well nigh obsessed with.  And eventually, he is able to piece together the tragic story of a much beloved musician and man who went missing while on tour in then dictator-ruled Argentina -- leaving behind a wife, children, mistress and many friends mourning his disappearance from their lives.

 

At one level, They Shot the Piano Player is a enthralling dramatic investigation into what happened to a piano player who look to have unwittingly got involved in South American politics, to his great detriment.  At another, it's a chilling indictment of totalitarian regimes and their state terrorism -- which, in South America, led, among other tragedies, to the "disappearance" tens of thousands of people, many, if not all, of them innocents.  At the same time, it's also a beautifully hand-drawn work that's a thoroughly affecting celebration of bossa nova, and the life of Tenório Júnior.

 

It is very much to its makers' credit that they attempted to do so much, and succeeded in doing so.  A feast for the eyes and ears, this work -- which also happens to be tri-lingual (English, Portuguese and Spanish) -- is also heart-breaking and heart-warming at different parts of its story -- which, it is worth emphasizing, is, at heart, non-fiction. (The fictional bit comes from the man who became obsessed with the story of Tenório Júnior -- so much so that he kept at it for some two decades! -- being not Jeff Harris but the film's co-director and scriptwriter, Fernando Trueba -- and instead of writing a book about the Brazilian musician, he made They Shot the Piano Player!)

My rating for this film: 9.0

Of "seditious" t-shirts and flags, and relatives "under suspicion" in Hong Kong

  

Not everyone who has a boarding pass for a plane at Hong Kong

International Airport is allowed to board the plane... :S

 

The past 48 hours or so has seen, first, the parents and two sisters of Simon Cheng taken in for questioning by the Hong Kong police and then also the mother of Frances Hui.  Simon Cheng and Frances Hui are exiled Hong Kongers accused of breaking the national security law and consequently have had HK$1 million bounties placed on each of their heads by the Hong Kong government.  

 

Their relatives appear to have been harassed by the police because they happen to be the close relatives of these two activists: one of whom first made the news after he, who was then a British Consul worker, was detained and tortured by the Mainland police in 2019, and has since been granted asylum by the United Kingdom; the other of whom was the first Hong Konger granted asylum by the United States of America.  It doesn't sound like any of Simon Cheng or Frances Hui's relatives have been detained or arrested (though/thus far).  

 

Something that cannot be said of Chu Kai-poon, a 26-year-old Hong Konger who was arrested last November after a Hong Kong International Airport security guard spotted Chu wearing a long-sleeve top with the phrase “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times,” on it and now has been jailed for three months for that "crime".  Yes, really. I wish I was kidding but I am not.

 

According to a government statement at the time, Chu was arrested near a boarding gate by police who had “sped to the scene.” Note: Chu was on his way OUT of Hong Kong at the time of his arrest. Did the police (seriously) think that he was going to do something like hijack or bomb the plane while wearing his "seditious" t-shirt (i.e., the one with the words "Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Times" -- which were often heard being chanted during pro-democracy protests in 2019 and 2020 -- on it)?

 

After he was apprehended, the police "also found three flags that bore the same slogan – as well as another t-shirt that had “Hong Kong independence” printed on it – in his possession." Note: he wasn't waving the flags around in the airport.  Instead, it sounds like they just were in his baggage.

 

As reported by the Hong Kong Free Press: "Designated national security judge Chief Magistrate Victor So said on Wednesday that the offence was less serious than in other sedition cases as it involved a small number of items and a relatively short period of time." More on the "relatively short period of time" bit: "The judge said that between leaving his residence and arriving at the airport, Chu only publicly demonstrated the protest slogan for five hours and 23 minutes."  

 

And yet he got a three month prison sentence for these "crimes"!  Something which I find pretty crazy; and so too does at least Samuel Bickett -- who, lest we forget -- is a trained lawyer (unlike me)!  Also, as he damningly pointed out in his Tweet about this sentencing and verdict: "Hong Kong law guarantees free speech in the Basic Law, bill of rights, and even the National Security Law. Yet every single judge who has heard these speech crime cases has ignored these guarantees."

 

For those of you outside of Hong Kong who've been thinking of visiting it: I know some of you may think that "Hong Kong politics are of no concern to me, I'm just here to eat/have fun/enjoy myself". And look, even I, who am very much concerned with Hong Kong's political situation, still eat and can have fun and enjoy myself here (and even take flights out of Hong Kong to spend time eating, having fun and enjoying myself out of it).  

 

But I also am very much aware of what is happening here, concerned with it and, well, yes, I have to admit that I sometimes wonder how much oppression/ludicrousness/curtailing of freedoms (including freedom of expression) around and also on me I'm willing to accept before I, too, will feel like I need to leave Hong Kong.:(

Jimmy Lai's national security law trial dominates the Hong Kong news on the first week of the new year

Never not feel shocked at seeing Jimmy Lai pictured 

in chains on the front pages of his own newspaper -- 

this from back in May 2021, when Apple Daily still existed

 

Jimmy Lai's national security law trial has finally got going in earnest this week.  On the first working day of 2024, the former media mogul formally "pleaded not guilty to conspiring to collude with foreign forces and publishing “seditious” materials".  "Wearing a dark-coloured jacket and a white shirt, the 76-year-old founder of pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily, addressed the court for the first time on Tuesday since the trial began on December 18" and effectively confirmed that he's not going to go down without a fight even though the odds are clearly stacked against him thanks to his trial being jury-less and presided over by three judges handpicked by the authorities.

The prosecution begun delivering its opening statement after Lai had submitted his not guilty pleas.  And pretty soon, it became obvious that some -- if not all -- of the aspects of the arguments it seeks to make can seem very questionable from the viewpoints of many observers.

For example, the court was given a list of people named as “co-conspirators” that included a former US consul-general to Hong Kong (James Cunningham), the founder of the Global Magnitsky Justice Campaign (Bill Browder) and a former Japanese Member of the Diet (Japanese Parliament) (Shiori Kanno).  This even though Jimmy Lai had never met or spoken to some of them -- this according to some of them (E.g., Bill Browder)!  And here's this from another person named as a co-conspirator -- Hong Kong Watch's Benedict Rogers: "People who simply campaigned for democracy deemed "co-conspirators" with Jimmy Lai[.] People who simply spoke with him are "collaborators"[.] Who next? Everyone who bought Apple Daily?"

Then, on Wednesday, the prosecutors sought to make a big deal out the fact that Jimmy Lai "Followed" a number of foreign politicians on Twitter.  (Note: This was actually mentioned back in December 2020, and thought to be absurd then!)  In a sign of how weak such a charge is, even at least one of the three national security judges presiding over the case, Alex Lee, didn't find this all that damning. “He’s interested in international affairs, so?” was apparently his reaction!

Rather understandably, Caoilfhionn Gallagher, the British King's Counsel who's the leader of Jimmy Lai's international team, was moved to Tweet that: "Today’s developments in [Jimmy Lai’s] trial are ludicrous. It is now clear he is being tried for: conspiracy to commit journalism; conspiracy to talk about politics to politicians; & conspiracy to raise human rights concerns with human rights organisations. This farce must end."

But continue, it has.  And so has the pointing out of holes galore in the prosecution's case.  For example, yesterday (Thursday) saw Samuel Bickett (who, remember, is a trained lawyer as well as a political activist) pointing out that "the prosecutor [had] focused on ads Lai allegedly funded calling for the world to support Hong Kong’s [extradition bill turned pro-democracy] protests. They were published in Aug 2019, almost a year before Beijing imposed the [National Security] Law under which Jimmy is now charged".  

Here's the issue: "It is a fundamental principle that laws only apply to future acts, not past ones. For Jimmy, the court is simply choosing to ignore that principle. Beijing said in the lead up to the NSL’s passage that the law would not be applied retroactively." (See this for the record.)

Yesterday also saw Jimmy Lai's international legal team file an urgent appeal with the United Nations special rapporteur on torture regarding one of the key prosecution witnesses in Lai’s trial; pointing out that "there is “credible evidence” that Andy Li, a 33-year-old former pro-democracy activist, was tortured while in prison in mainland China before he confessed to allegedly conspiring with Lai to collude with foreign forces." (For more details, see this Washington Post piece by Shibani Mahtani, and the book by her and Timothy McLaughlin that it's excerpted from, Among the Braves: Hope, Struggle, and Exile in the Battle for Hong Kong and the Future of Democracy (Hachette Books, 2023) -- which, against the odds, there are copies of here in Hong Kong.)  

As this farce proceeds, it's worth reading the following musings by Bloomberg's Matthew Brooker:  

In their quieter moments, do the more sensible people in Beijing ever wonder where the likes of CY Leung have led them to in Hong Kong. We are still waiting for the evidence of foreign black hands [behind the Umbrella Movement] that CY promised us almost a decade ago. And now look where we are…

They have destroyed businesses, jailed dozens of politicians and incarcerated 76-year-old Jimmy Lai on sedition and collusion charges — and still they have nothing to show for it, except the most mundane innocent contacts that are part and parcel of everyday life for journalists.

Lai is accused of doing what everyone else did in Hong Kong - including pro-Beijing politicians - in talking to foreign diplomats. And for this, they trashed Hong Kong’s international reputation and undermined trust in its rule of law. Do they think they got their money’s worth?

What they have produced so far couldn’t even be called thin gruel. It is nothing at all. All they have demonstrated is that they have no idea of how Hong Kong society functioned - no understanding of the distinct way of life they undertook to preserve.

Beijing always had the power to do this, whatever its promises. But was wrecking Hong Kong in this way really in China’s interests? It’s easy to see what it has lost, much harder to discern what it has gained.

Spotlight on Hong Kong, the national security law trial of Jimmy Lai, and prosecution witness Andy Li

 

Winter is -- and gray days are -- here in Hong Kong

 

This past Saturday, the temperatures dropped quite a bit and there's now a distinct chill in the air.  Still, it wasn't the cold air that made me shiver this morning but, rather, what I read in a piece by Shibani Mahtani for the Washington Post about what happened to Andy Li, a pro-democracy activist who's scheduled to be a key witness for the prosecution in the long-delayed national security trial of Jimmy Lai which finally got underway today. (How long delayed? Here's pointing out that he was arrested back in August 2020 and in and out of jail through to December 2020, when he was decisively denied bail and been behind bars since!)

 

The title of an article in The Guardian about the trial begins with the words "The world watches" -- and it does feel like Hong Kong is back in the international spotlight today.  Jimmy Lai's trial begins "two weeks after another landmark hearing came to an end on 4 December. The Hong Kong 47 mass trial of pro-democracy activists was the biggest national security law case since the legislation was implemented in Hong Kong in June 2020, quelling a year of protests against the tightening grip of the Chinese Communist party on the city. Lai’s trial has just one defendant. But," Amy Hawkins asserts, "it will be just as, if not more, significant for Hong Kong’s global standing."

 

"Lai, who turned 76 in jail this month, is charged with colluding with foreign forces under the national security law, as well as sedition. If convicted, which experts say is highly likely, the British national faces spending the rest of his life in prison."  Something noted there, which many people and media have not done so for much of this time, is that Jimmy Lai has a British passport -- a full fledged one as opposed to the "British National (Overseas)" passports issued to many Hong Kongers. But, due to his ethnicity, the authorities in Beijing -- and their proxies in Hong Kong -- consider him Chinese.  As well as an enemy of the Chinese state.

A reminder: the British government was a co-signer with the Chinese government of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. That 1984 document set the conditions in which then British-ruled Hong Kong was transferred to Chinese control and for the governance of the territory after 1 July 1997.  And it's the Sino-British Joint Declaration that had it that Hong Kong would be governed from July 1st, 1997, to June 30th, 2046, under something that came to be known as "One country, two systems": i.e., it would be part of the People's Republic of China but a Special Administrative Region that would enjoy a "high degree of autonomy" and, among other things, would have universal suffrage for its residents -- something which, of course, does not exist in the rest of China.

 

Returning to The Guardian's piece about Jimmy Lai's upcoming trial: "Lai’s trial is expected to run until spring 2024, with a verdict expected in autumn. It will be presided over by a panel of judges handpicked by the Hong Kong chief executive to handle national security cases.  Elaine Pearson, the Asia director for Human Rights Watch, [has] said [that] “Lai’s trial has been marred by serious violations of fair trial rights such as denying him a lawyer of his own choosing and handpicking judges. Beijing seems intent on imprisoning one of its most powerful critics for many years, possibly for the rest of his life.”"

 

Something else that is disturbing about the trial: its having witnesses for the prosecution like Andy Li.  A member of the Hong Kong 12 taken into custody in Shenzhen after a bid to flee to Taiwan by speedboat was foiled by Chinese coastguards, he looks to have been tortured while behind bars in Mainland China.

 

Quoting from Shibani Mahtani's piece: "Li, a 33-year-old gifted programmer who during the protests became a significant player in international lobbying and fundraising efforts, has already pleaded guilty under the national security law for his own role in the democracy movement, and he is expected to tie Lai to an alleged foreign conspiracy against Hong Kong and China. But Li was mistreated while in Chinese custody, a year-long Washington Post examination of the case found, raising questions about whether his testimony will be voluntary and reliable." 

 

Since returning to Hong Kong, Andy Li has been held in a Hong Kong psychiatric facility.  If that doesn't sound nuts and bad already, consider these passages from the Washington Post article which I find disturbing and chilling:  

For the first three months, according to several people familiar with the conditions, [the Hong Kong 12] were confined to these solitary cells, where two guards on shift took turns to watch them around-the-clock, even as they went to the bathroom. The lights were always on. During the day, they were forced to sit cross-legged on a concrete stool until their joints grew sore, except during mealtimes or interrogations. Walking around the cell was generally not permitted. At night, they were awakened at random hours, for no apparent reason. They were never allowed outside.

 

The interrogations were relentless during those initial months, the people familiar with the conditions said. Guards threatened to send them to Xinjiang — where the Chinese government has arbitrarily detained more than a million Muslim Uyghurs and subjected them to torture, forced sterilization, surveillance and other conditions, according to the United Nations — if they did not detail their attempted escape.

 

Most of the 12 were not physically abused, but seven people familiar with conditions at the center said screaming could “consistently” be heard coming from one cell: Li’s.

 

“It is likely that what [Li] faced inside was 10 times worse” than the rest, one person said.

If things were normal in Hong Kong, I think it would be safe to say that anything that Andy Li says at this point would be treated with suspicion as to its credibility.  Instead, the chance is extremely high that his words will be taken at surface value by the handpicked judges presiding over Jimmy Lai's trial.  And that in and of itself already will say a lot about whether justice can still truly be served, and served up, in Hong Kong in the national security law era.

Nine years on from the beginning of the Umbrella Movement

  

A glass I got from Chickeeduck with an image that helps ensure 

that I don't forget  the Umbrella Movement

 

My blog entry from nine years ago today.  And seven years ago today.  And six years ago today.  And four years ago today.  And three years ago today.  And two years ago today.  Suffice to say that I've not forgotten the (start of) the Umbrella Movement.  And that remembering it is something that is part of ensuring that Hong Kong will not be a part of the People's Republic of Amnesia (which, for me, is not only about forgetting what happened in Mainland China on June 4th, 1989, but, also, what's happened  to Hong Kong since its Handover by the British to China).            

In the words of Milan Kundera (which, of course, was quoted in the recently banned short story Our Time): 'The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting".  And for the record, this is what preceded those lines: "The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long that nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was..."

 

So, remember, remember... not just the 5th of November and 4th of June but also the 28th of September, the 9th, 12th and 16th of June, the 21st of July, the 31st of August, etc.  And, also, remember that "Resistance is not futile" (and even the Borg can be, and were, defeated)!.

Thinking of Jimmy Lai even as Hong Kong continues to add to its total number of political prisoners

  

This sight got me thinking of Jimmy Lai... and I wouldn't be 

surprised if that's the case for a number of others too

 \

A 20-year-old Hongkonger was sentenced today to two and half years imprisonment for "rioting" when she was 16 years of age.  The case of Tsang Ling-yi revolved around a protest which took place on October 6th, 2019, the day after the government’s controversial Face Covering Regulation – meant to deter pro-democracy protesters from hiding their identities – came into effect. 

 

A Hong Kong Free Press piece on Tsang's case reported that "Tsang’s sentencing was previously pushed back to allow more time for mitigation and for the judge to decide an appropriate punishment. Given her age, the court had twice sought background reports to assess if Tsang should be sentenced to a training centre, according to local media. Training centres are an alternative to imprisonment for young offenders and place emphasis on rehabilitation."

 

Over on Twitter, a commentator offered an alternate take on this: "Not sure of the legal realities/details behind this, but it's hard not to see this as a case of GovHK waiting until she was legally an adult so they could sentence her as one. Whether that's the intention or not, I struggle to see this as justice."  And I must say that I'm inclined to see credence in his view.

 

The following remarks by Goose Lee prompted by the news of this case also hit home for me: "People outside of Hong Kong regularly ask me how things are now and I tell them that people are still being arrested and imprisoned EVERY DAY. It’s unrelenting and extremely depressing. They’re generally stunned to hear this".   And add to this that there already are so many political prisoners behind bars in Hong Kong; some of them because they have been denied bail rather than having actually been found guilty of any crimes.

Among them is, of course, Jimmy Lai -- whose name was mentioned a number of times in the British government's Six-monthly report on Hong Kong: 1 January to 30 June, 2023 released today. An example: "British national Jimmy Lai’s national security trial has been further delayed. His prosecution is highly politicised and I raised his case in Beijing last month. We continue to press for consular access. The international community is paying close attention to his case and many others. We urge the Hong Kong authorities to uphold the rule of law and to comply with international norms and standards."

 

Thus far though, these urgings have been in vain.  Adding insult to injury, AFP's Xinqi Su reported over on Twitter that: "The UK continued to request consular access to [Jimmy Lai] during the reporting period. [But i]t continued to be denied by the Hong Kong authorities on the basis that they do not recognise dual nationality, and therefore do not recognise his British nationality."

 

Still, Jimmy Lai's supporters are persisting in ensuring that he is not forgotten and that his story will be known to more people.  For example, yesterday saw a thoroughly sympathetic National Review piece on him, a number of whose sections I'm quoting here:

He is a legendary businessman. A champion of liberal democracy. And a political prisoner in Hong Kong. His story is heroic...

 

He is an ardent democrat, yes. A freedom fighter, in a sense. He is also an ardent Catholic. Lai wanted to devote himself to what he held to be the higher and most important things in life...

Jimmy Lai has been in prison since the last day of 2020. The authorities raided his newspaper, twice — first with 200 agents, then with 500 — shutting it down and arresting various executives, in addition to Lai.

[Jimmy Lai's son,] Sebastien points out that [the Apple Daily staff] worked valiantly till the end. “Reporters were staying up until 5 in the morning, because 5 is usually when they knock on your door and grab you away to the police station...

 

The Chinese authorities have invented charges against Jimmy Lai... They have convicted him of fraud. They have convicted him of unauthorized assembly... They want Lai out of the way and shut up. They are also sending a message: “If we can do this to the great and famous Jimmy Lai, we can do it to anyone.”

 

According to reports, Lai is kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day. He is in his mid 70s. What the government is doing to him, as Sebastien says, “is cruel. Just cruel.”

 

Sebastien is a key part of the worldwide campaign to highlight Jimmy’s case and win his release. The Chinese government has put bounties on the heads of Hong Kongers in exile — exiles who continue to speak out against tyranny in their home city. Asked whether he is taking precautions, Sebastian pauses. He then says, “Look, my father does not deserve to be in jail, and I’ll keep fighting until he’s out.”...

He admires his father a great deal, and he understands his father’s decision to stay: to be imprisoned, rather than seek exile. “You don’t get to choose where you were born,” says Sebastien. “But often you get to choose where you call home. And Dad chose to call Hong Kong home, and when someone comes for your home and your people, you stand firm.” (my emphasis)

Artistic, food and music matters that are (negatively) affected by politics

A highly prized (and ultra delicious) portion of sushi

whose otoro came from Shiogama

Last week was the first week in a long while when I didn't blog (much) at all about politics and instead, waxed lyrical about an old Hong Kong movie, a supermoon and beautiful Hong Kong sunsets.  Sadly, the first blog post of this new week is going to address matters affected by politics -- though they pertain too to art, food and music: the kind of subjects that, ideally, (also) would bring happiness and satisfaction into one's life rather than anger and frustration.

 

The first of these involves a locale in London rather than Hong Kong.  But what's been happening over at Brick Lane in the past 48 hours or so brings to mind what happened to the Lennon Walls in Hong Kong: involving the destruction of creative spaces by pro-Beijingers, a reaction to it by those who appreciate and wish to exercise free speech and expression, the authorities (specifically the city council in the case of Brick Lane) stepping in -- and the creative process happening again (hopefully without further destruction at Brick Lane -- something that sadly has not been the case in Hong Kong).    

 

The second involves Hong Kong's stated plan to ban seafood from 10 different Japanese prefectures after water used for cooling the Fukushima nuclear power station is released into the sea near it.  More specifically, despite more than one person having pointed out that the Hong Kong government is being hypocritical in its complaint about the Fukushima wastewater (and Beijing's too for that matter), it has not indicated that it will change its stated plan of action.  

 

And since it now looks like the Fukushima nuclear station will begin begin releasing its wastewater as soon as the end of this month, it means that Hong Kongers will soon stop being to enjoy delicacies such as Miyagi oysters and tuna from Shiogama.  Also, if the ban is also on products that involve inland water in their production -- as might be the case since the 10 Japanese prefectures on the list include landlocked ones! -- maybe even sake and beer?!  Now that would really seem unscientific!  And for the record: a number of the listed prefectures (including Nagano, Niigata and Ibaraki) are home to highly regarded sake breweries (such as those which brew Wataribune and Masumi sake!) while Saitama is home to the famous Coedo beer!

Adding to this troubling trifecta is the not unexpected -- but still upsetting -- news that the Hong Kong government has launched a bid to appeal against the High Court’s rejection of its attempt to ban pro-democracy protest anthem Glory to Hong Kong.  This not even two weeks after the High Court rejected its application for an injunction to block the dissemination online of popular pro-democracy anthem, Glory to Hong Kong.

 

Over on Twitter (yes, I still don't think of it as X!), Ming Pao's Alvin Lum noted that "Leave to appeal from the same judge is required before matter heads to the Court of Appeal".  Things being the way they are in Hong Kong, I wouldn't be surprised if the judge gives that "leave to appeal" -- and for his decision to be overturned at the Court of Appeal.  But I also have been pleasantly surprised by some pushbacks along the way.  

 

So, well, hope springs eternal.  Or as the proverbial "they" say: Expect the worst but hope for the best (or, at least, some good to happen at least every once in a while -- because, well, if one doesn't do that, than one might just want to give up, on the fight, Hong Kong and even life itself)! :S

Visits to the 2023 Hong Kong Book Fair, and an alternative, "yellow" book fair (Photo-essay)

Earlier this week, I went to the 2023 Hong Kong Book Fair.  Having been to the book fair for a number of years now, certain trends are quite noticeable.  In addition to the obvious one of there being fewer and fewer "yellow" booths and books that are explicitly political on sale (even between 2016 and 2017, never mind after China imposed a national security law on Hong Kong), there also are way fewer English language books on sale -- and, actually, fewer exhibitor space for booksellers.  Also, maybe it's just me but there seems to be a lot more stalls hawking religious (more specifically, that which are Buddhist or Christian) books this year than any other year that I've been to the Hong Kong Book Fair!

 

On a brighter note: certain tomes that I was glad to see available for sale at the book fair last year remain available for sale this year.  Also, The Standard has reported that "a few small publishers [were] selling "politically sensitive" books that can no longer be found in public libraries, including books written by Au Ka-lun, a former columnist for the shuttered Stand News".  And while an alternative book fair for "yellow" book publishers and sellers was not able to take place last year, this year one organized by Hunter Bookstore's Leticia Wong did go ahead over in Sham Shui Po -- and when I went to check it out, I found that at least one bookseller that was among the smaller book fair's participants and also had a booth at the larger Hong Kong Book Fair! :)

 

Books I bought at book fairs I went to in recent days: 

Want to/can you guess which one(s) I got from the alternative 

book fair (as opposed to the Hong Kong Book Fair)? ;b

 

Yes, books by Xi Jinping and his ilk were on prominent display/for sale 

at the 2023 Hong Kong Book Fair -- but note that the booth attracted 

very few interested customers despite having a prominent location!

 

For comparison: note the crowd at a more "regular" booth 

(whose offerings included works by Nietzsche!) at the book fair!

 

Unlike last year, I didn't spot the copaganda booth this year

-- but I did see this for the first time at the Hong Kong Book Fair!

 

Also at the fair: a fair amount of Taiwanese representation

 

Two books that I found for sale at more than one booth:

George Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984

 

Another book whose sale (or non-sale) I reckon is a good

weathervane for book fair censorship is this tome by 

Vaclac Havel, and, also, Timothy Snyder's On Tyranny

 

Probably the most popular national leader/politician this year -- 

books about Volodymyr Zelenskyy abounded, in both English

and Chinese (along with ones on Queen Elizabeth II)!

Unable to get their hands on Nathan Law, the authorities in Hong Kong went for his friends and now also his family :(

Gone (as in covered up) but still not forgotten

 

"Hong Kong police searched the family home of exiled pro-democracy activist Nathan Law on Tuesday morning, taking relatives away for questioning, the city’s public broadcaster RTHK reported, citing sources.  It came just a week after police placed HK$1 million bounties on information leading to the arrest of Law and seven other prominent activists in self-imposed exile wanted for national security offenses, in a move strongly condemned by rights groups and Western governments."  Thus began a CNN piece on the latest development in a saga that is threatening to run and run -- and, in the process, drag Hong Kong's international reputation further down.  

 

I'm referring, of course, to the move by the Hong Kong government to put HK$1 million bounties on the heads of eight self-exiled pro-democracy activists -- four of whom had previously been elected to the Legislative Councillor (with far more votes than the likes of John Lee, Carrie Lam and Leung Chun-ying have ever received in over the course of their political careers); related actions of which have included arresting five individuals who used to belong to the same now defunct political party, Demosisto, as Nathan Law (and had been working on/for the Mee Yellow Economic Circle shopping app which now also is no more). 

 

For those who didn't know: Nathan Law is a former Legislative Councillor -- Hong Kong's youngest ever when he was elected to office in 2016 -- who went into exile days after China imposed a national security law on Hong Kong on June 30th, 2020. He was granted political asylum by the British government soon after.  Also, in August of that year, he publicly cut ties with his family -- presumably because he feared/foresaw that the Hong Kong government would try to use them to get him. But that has not prevented his parents and elder brother from being effectively harassed by the police, with the possibility of being arrested by them.

 

The CNN article also reported this: "Responding to the police action, Law issued a statement on Facebook denying any financial support from his family.  “I can say this with certainty. Those relevant people and I have no financial ties. My work has nothing to do with them,” he said. “Any suggestions of ‘assistance’ is purely absurd.”" 

 

And this: "The Hong Kong government has repeatedly denied the national security law is suppressing freedoms.  Instead, it insists the law has ended chaos and restored stability to the city."  To which I'll say: I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest that if you were to be able to get people in Hong Kong to speak their minds, I'd wager that far more reckon the former rather than the latter with regards to the effects of the national security law on the city.  And the fact that it's harder now than pre-June 30th, 2020, to get people freely speaking their minds already tells you a lot about Hong Kong's loss of freedom in the past three years or so.

 

On a personal note: Back in 2021, I met up with a friend who had, prior to the coming into effect of the national security law, divided his time between Hong Kong and the US.  I was surprised/shocked when he said he couldn't discern any sign of protest or major repression then (compared to when he was in the city in late 2019).  Even so, he did feel then that things would be taking a turn for a worse; so didn't know when he'd return to Hong Kong -- and when we said our goodbyes, I wondered whether I'd ever see him again, particularly in this part of the world.  

 

So I was quite surprised when he told me a couple of months back that he'll be returning for at least one more visit.  Well, he's back again now and/but this time around, he definitely notices the repression: as in some of his (other) friends are now apparently leery of meeting up with him -- and he shared that one of his friends has had her place broken into twice, and he suspects it now may be bugged!  This experience has made him more nervous and jittery than when I met him in just two years ago.  And I suspect that he really will be disinclined to return to Hong Kong again after he departs this time around.

 

Returning to Nathan Law, who I hope will not return to Hong Kong until it is truly free, and the recent CNN piece about him: "Last week, Law said in a statement that while the news of the bounties was stressful and meant he’d have to be more careful while traveling, it didn’t come as a surprise. He criticized the national security law as being used to “suppress dissenting voices,” and reiterated his hope for Hong Kong to one day gain full democracy.

 

"“I am just a Hong Konger speaking out for Hong Kongers – that’s all,” he said, and urged the public not to cooperate with the bounty offer. “We should not silence or limit ourselves, we should not be politically intimidated or blackmailed, or live in fear.”"  To which I'll say: "Hear, hear!"

International recognition of Chow Hang-tung, and Hong Kong's lack of press freedom on World Press Freedom Day (May 3rd)

Golden sky in Hong Kong the day after Golden Week ended! :D

 

Let's start with what passes for good news for pro-democracy Hong Kongers in the national security law era: It was announced yesterday that Hong Kong lawyer-activist Chow Hang-tung had been chosen by South Korea's May 18 Memorial Foundation as the winner of this year's Gwangju Prize for Human Rights.  ""Chow Hang-tung's struggle against the Hong Kong government's undemocratic, inhumane treatment has become the source of courage and hope for human rights advocates and those longing for democracy around the world, even when she is in custody," said Moon Hee-sang, head of the judging panel and former speaker of the National Assembly."

 

Some context from an article in The Korea Times: "The Gwangju Prize for Human Rights was established in 2000 to mark the spirit of the Korean movement for democracy and honor those who fight for human rights and peace. Previous winners include Cynthia Maung, a Burmese doctor and founder of Mae Tao Clinic which has been providing free healthcare services for internally displaced people and migrant workers, and Arnon Nampa, a Thai human rights lawyer and vocal critic of the country's monarchy."  (The Gwangju Uprising, known in South Korea as May 18, began in Gwangju on May 18th, 1980, and had as its goal the ending of dictatorial rule in the country.)

 

Also from the same South Korean new piece: "Chow, 38, who is in prison now after being convicted of inciting and taking part in arranging an unlawful assembly ― a commemoration of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre ― has become a symbolic figure for everyone who is longing for democracy, a judging committee said at the May 18 Memorial Foundation office in Gwangju".  And yes, it is heartening to get more confirmation that Chow is seen as such in territories beyond Hong Kong as well as her native Hong Kong.  (More than by the way, Chow Hang-tung also is one of six Hong Kongers nominated for the Nobel Peace Price this year.)

 

Sadly, since Chow is currently behind bars (and looks to be so for a time), she will not be able to travel to Gwangju to accept her award.  Instead, "[o]n behalf of Chow, her representative is expected to receive the award at the ceremony on May 18, Korea's anniversary of the 1980 pro-democracy uprising in the southwestern city."  And if it so happens that the six Hong Kongers nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize were to win it (a long shot but, hey, there's a chance!), they all would have to have representatives accept it on their behalf -- as was the case with Liu Xiaobo back in 2010.  

 

While we're on the subject: another of the six Hong Kong Nobel Peace Prize nominees is Gwyneth Ho, another Hong Kong political prisoner I got to thinking of yesterday as a result of it being World Press Freedom Day on account of her having been a journalist before becoming a political activist.  Ho and Chow are just two of the Hong Kongers I have much respect and admiration for; with ex-Stand News chief editor Chung Pui-kuen being another, and a fourth being former RTHK program producer Bao Choy, who yesterday began her final appeal over her conviction for making false statements to obtain vehicle records to make a documentary about the July 21st, 2019, Yuen Long attacks.   

 

The fact that Gwyneth Ho is currently a political prisoner, Chung Pui-kuen is on trial for sedition (and may well end up serving time being bars) and Bao was convicted for what many people don't see as a crime should tell you something about the state of journalism in Hong Kong. Put another way: it's not a surprise to see Hong Kong "languish near the bottom of the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) press freedom ranking released on Wednesday’s World Press Freedom Day".

 

More specifically, Hong Kong "ranked 140th among the 180 regions in the international media watchdog’s latest ranking, trailing behind Colombia and Cameroon. [Meanwhile, (Mainland)] China ranked 179th, just above North Korea."  And while it's true that Hong Kong's ranking this year is eight positions higher than it was last year, it's only because press freedom had deteriorated even more in other territories rather than because the situation in Hong Kong had improved from a year ago!

 

As Cédric Alviani, East Asia bureau director of RSF pointed out, the international media watchdog noticed that 13 “press freedom defenders” (who include Gwyneth Ho and Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai) had been detained under “trumped up charges” in Hong Kong.  In addition, the RSF "had observed “an increasing number of journalists in exile,” including those who made “a very difficult decision to leave their home due to increasing pressure from the government” for places including the UK and Taiwan."

 

Speaking of which: Taiwan is at number 35 in the RSF's press freedom ranking -- which makes it the highest ranked Asian territory.  For context and comparison: the top-ranked territory is Norway, the United Kingdom is positioned at number 25, the United States is ranked at number 45, South Korea is at number 47 -- and even Malaysia, whose press I don't consider all that free, is at number 73; a whopping 67 places higher than Hong Kong!   

The Hong Konger wants Jimmy Lai and his extraordinary struggle for freedom to neither be forgotten nor in vain (Film review)

  

Currently available to view on Youtube

 

The Hong Konger: Jimmy Lai's Extraordinary Struggle for Freedom (U.S.A., 2022) 

- Ron Holwerda, director

 

The subject of this documentary was born in Guangzhou, China -- in 1948, according to this work (though Wikipedia is among the sources that lists his year of birth as 1947).  And early in this Acton Institute production, an interviewee says of Jimmy Lai that: "He's Chinese.  He loves being Chinese."  

 

Meanwhile, something that goes unmentioned in The Hong Konger: Jimmy Lai's Extraordinary Struggle for Freedom is that Jimmy Lai has British citizenship.  I wonder whether this was deliberate or an oversight.  In any case, I must admit to finding this omission rather strange; this not least because I think this fact would add to Jimmy Lai's overall tale rather than detract from it.  And would not take anything away from his being a Hong Konger (and Chinese).

 

When he was 12 years old, Jimmy Lai decided to stow away on a boat to Hong Kong.  Upon arrival, he went to work as a child laborer in a garment factory.  Having left China for the then British colony, he found both freedom and fortune in the city that he came to call home and has never left -- even when many people urged him to do so (to ensure his personal safety and avoid the fate that the Chinese authorities have long sought for him).

 

On August 20th, 2020, Jimmy Lai was arrested on the charge of "foreign collusion".  In December of that year, he was arrested again and charged under the National Security Law that China imposed on Hong Kong.  Denied bail that time around, he has been behind bars ever since.  But not forgotten.  Something that the people behind The Hong Konger: Jimmy Lai's Extraordinary Struggle for Freedom -- some of whom are Jimmy Lai's personal friends (including Acton Institute co-founder Robert Sirico); two of whom (Mark Simon and Simon Lee) are his former employees; a few of whom are Hong Kong activists in exile (like Joey Siu, Sunny Cheung and Samuel Chu); and many of whom are senior political figures (none more so than Chris Patten, the last governor of Hong Kong) -- are seeking to ensure stays so.  

 

When viewing this slickly made work, I found myself wondering how many of those others who have seen it had heard of Jimmy Lai before they viewed it.  To be sure, in Hong Kong, his is a household name (as is that of the clothing chain he founded, Giordano, and the pro-democracy newspaper he established, Apple Daily).  But while this documentary is about a Hong Konger, I get the distinct sense that -- unlike with, say, Kiwi Chow's protest documentary, Revolution of Our Times -- its primary target audience isn't actually Hong Kongers; and this not just because the film is in English (rather than Cantonese) either.

 

Something else that I definitely get the sense -- and not just because of the names I saw in the end credits either -- is that this film is (primarily) made by non-Hong Kongers.  As a result, some factual mistakes can be made (or facts glossed over): including a map and potted history of Hong Kong that divides the territory into Hong Kong Island and the New Territories, with Kowloon not rating a mention; and 2019 protest footage being shown when the 2014 "Occupy" phase of the Umbrella Movement was being discussed.  

It may seem like I'm being nitpicky.  But when making a film like this one (which has a specific agenda -- to free Jimmy Lai -- and might be described as a propaganda piece even if its messages are ones that I agree with for the most part), I think that little mistakes provide can cast doubt on other facts and sections of the presentation.  Which, frankly, is a pity -- because the story of Jimmy Lai is one that is very much worth learning about, and his plight is one that should concern those who value and appreciate freedom even half as much as he does. 

 

A business tycoon but also a political activist -- of whom Chris Patten said is "not always right but extremely brave" -- Jimmy Lai wanted democracy and freedom for Hong Kongers (and -- actually this is what made the authorities over in Beijing most angry -- Mainland Chinese people too).  And he was willing to give money and put his body on the line for this -- unlike the majority of Hong Kongers of his socio-economic station.

 

Something which The Hong Konger: Jimmy Lai's Extraordinary Struggle for Freedom points out -- and absolutely is worth noting though -- is that he insisted on peaceful protest.  There are some who might fault him for doing so.  But I, for one, actually think that this makes him deserve to be free all the more.  Along with all those other of Hong Kong's political prisoners who love Hong Kong so very much and have sacrificed so much for it already. 

 

My rating for this film: 7.5