Hong Kong's national security law nets five teenagers and an online radio host! :(

Graffiti spotted enroute to M+ earlier this week 

 

"Five teenage members of a Hong Kong group advocating independence from Chinese rule were ordered by a judge on Saturday [i.e., yesterday] to serve up to three years in detention at a correctional facility for urging an "armed revolution" in a national security [law] case.  The five, some of whom were minors aged between 15 and 18 at the time of the alleged offence, had pleaded guilty to "inciting others to subvert state power" through a group named "Returning Valiant"."  Thus went the first couple of lines of a Reuters article that has appeared in news media all over the world, including Britain's The Guardian.

 

Before anything else, do me a favor and ask yourself this: can you remember when you were a teenager, specifically 15 years of age?  If so, do you think your 15 year old self -- or any 15 year old, for that matter, or even any 16, 17 or 18 year old -- could seriously be a national security risk?  Almost needless to say: my answer with regards to myself, etc. is a big fat emphatic "No". Heck, I don't even think a 15 year old Hitler, Mao or Putin could have been!  

 

So... how insecure is a state that considers the teenage members of "Returning Valiant" -- whose total members, by the way, number not more than 30 or even 25 -- to be such serious national security risks that they have already been behind bars for several months (after being arrested in May of last year and denied bail all this time) and could end up being so for up to three years?  Also, how seriously can one consider a judge who says such as the following to be a fair and, well, sane one?  

 

"Even if only one person is incited by them, the social stability of Hong Kong and the safety of residents may be seriously endangered... There's no evidence to directly prove that anyone was incited by the defendants to subvert state power, but this real risk exists."  And for the record: those are indeed the words of the presiding judge for the trial. As a Hong Konger angrily Tweeted upon reading this, ""What if…?!” is the foundation of #NSL bullshit trial and sentencing."

 

Speaking of "NSL bullshit": "Online radio host Edmund “Giggs” Wan [was] sentenced [on Friday] to two years and eight months in prison after he reached a plea agreement with the prosecution over his sedition and money laundering charges." (Note: sad but true, more and more, people are giving up on the Hong Kong courts being fair and just, and deciding to save time -- and money (think lawyer's fees, etc.) -- and plead guilty even though they don't actually believe they are, in fact, guilty of having committed any crimes.)  In return for his pleading guilty to those four charges, "a further six charges were kept on file", noted the Hong Kong Free Press article I'm quoting at length here.  

 

"The sedition charge related to 39 programmes hosted by Wan between February and November 2020 that contained “seditious” content, some of which “incited others to resist or overthrow the Chinese Communist Party” and “promote Hong Kong independence.”  In February 2020, Wan also called for donations via his website and on social media to support the living expenses of Hong Kong protesters who had travelled to seek refuge and study in Taiwan."  To make things clearer, consider the Hong Kong Democracy Council's summary of the matter: "He spoke out against the government & raised money for young protesters who fled to Taiwan."

 

"After taking into account the 20 months Wan has already spent in custody, a source told HKFP that he could be released in two to three months." (This because he was denied bail after being arrested.)  Thank goodness for small mercies?  But bear in mind the following too: "The court ordered Wan to hand over HK$4.87 million of his assets." So not only has the court deprived him of his freedoms, it's impoverished him.

 

I leave you with this statement from Amnesty International -- which, remember, exited Hong Kong last year in the wake of China imposing the national security law on Hong Kong on June 30th, 2020 -- on the matter: "With this reprehensible jailing of a DJ who dared to speak his mind and finance young protestors’ education, the Hong Kong authorities appear to be expanding the range of tools they use to target people whose views and actions they object to." :(