The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) today (December 18) strongly disapproves and objects to the slanders and smears by the foreign ministers of the G7, including Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), as well as the High Representative of the European Union, after the court of the HKSAR found Lai Chee-ying guilty of offences of endangering national security in strict accordance with the law and evidence.
Etc.
A couple of YouTube vids for anyone interested…
WSJ staff undermine an experimental AI-managed vending machine in their office, while an Anthropic guy afflicted with vocal fry grins and makes glib excuses. The problems will help improve the model so everyone will be able to trust AI to run their business!
Bart Ehrman on how the virgin birth became a Christian belief. (Recall David Hume’s supposed question about whether it was more likely that the laws of nature were suspended or that ‘a Jewish minx lied’.)
Probably should have tried one, but didn’t: bright and shiny Christmas donuts seen recently in Taipei…
If Hong Kong law enforcement agencies were a small plumbing/electrician business, their motto would be ‘no job too small’. From HKFP…
A Hong Kong man has pleaded guilty to one count of criminal damage after being accused of vandalising election posters, saying that he had only torn off a piece of a poster the size of his fingertip.
…On November 19, he allegedly damaged two official government posters that bore a slogan calling on residents to cast their ballots in the “patriots only” Legislative Council (LegCo) elections.
A police officer discovered the damaged posters on November 22 on a footbridge in Mong Kok, The Witness reported. Mo was identified as the suspect after surveillance footage showed him in the act three days earlier.
He was accused of damaging the two posters without lawful excuse, with the intention to damage the property or acting recklessly as to whether it might be damaged.
The court heard on Tuesday that Mo admitted under police caution that he only damaged the posters “for fun,” while the defence argued that Mo had only torn off a piece from one of the posters about the size of a fingertip, while no text on the poster was damaged.
These were not candidates’ banners – just two of the zillions of government ones featuring kiddy-cartoon character ballot boxes in an attempt to get people to vote. The cops went through ‘surveillance footage’?
A 16-year-old boy has been sentenced to three and a half years in prison for conspiring to commit secession by “actively participating” in a Taiwan-based group that advocates Hong Kong independence.
…He had earlier pleaded guilty in October to the charge in relation to his involvement in the Hong Kong Democratic Independence Union, which was declared a “prohibited organisation” by local authorities earlier this month.
…The court did not accept the teenager’s autism as a factor to reduce his sentence. He was given a one-third discount for his guilty plea and an additional two-month discount for his young age.
He was eventually jailed for 42 months.
Is the Hong Kong DIU a real organization or (as some might think the acronym suggests) a joke? Can a 16-year-old meaningfully threaten national security? Is this sentence a good use of taxpayers’ money?
On the subject of his neurodivergence – RTHK reports that Chinese U is launching a ‘pioneering technology’ that tests for autism in children…
Developed in collaboration with the CUHK spin-off MicroSigX Biotech Diagnostic, the world’s first “AI-Powered Multikingdom Microbial Biomarkers Technology” aims to enable earlier intervention and support for at-risk families.
…Siew Ng, associate dean of research at CU Medicine and Croucher Professor of Medical Sciences, said that there has been no simple diagnostic tool for ASD until now.
She said the new technology offers a non-invasive method using a stool test, with results available within two to three weeks.
Is this the moment Hong Kong gets to be a bio-tech hub-zone? Maybe, or maybe not. This is happening just as scientists are starting to express doubts whether there is in fact a link between the microbiome and autism – an area of research that…
…risks feeding into “pseudoscientific remedies and snake oil,” says Heini Natri, a biomedical researcher at the Translational Genomics Research Institute…
Why has the government cancelled the New Year fireworks? Maybe out of respect for the Tai Po fire victims (though why not say so?). Perhaps because a large gathering might turn into foreign-backed black-clad sedition (can’t rule it out). Or to save money (unlikely). Or to ward off an influx of tourists (we would be so lucky). Could it be the police are too overstretched to provide crowd control? Or things are just too awful.
After all the vitriolic mouth-frothing recently, let’s start with a pleasantly worded letter from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hong Kong office to the locally based overseas media…
To help foreign media gain a more comprehensive understanding of the case, as the Spokesperson for the Commissioner’s Office of the Chinese Foreign Ministry in the HKSAR, I wish to draw your attention to some facts regarding this matter.
Was Jimmy Lai convicted because of “press freedom”?
No. Jimmy Lai was not prosecuted for reporting news or expressing views through his media outlets. The crux of his charges was his collusion with foreign forces to endanger national security. Jimmy Lai is a primary mastermind and participant in a series of anti-China activities aimed at destabilizing Hong Kong, and a pawn for external anti-China forces. His case has nothing to do with press freedom.
Probably won’t convince anyone, but full marks for trying to avoid sounding like a psychopath.
One of the weirder habits of Hong Kong’s all-patriots/NatSec regime is the issuing of choreographed statements of support or approval for (typically unpopular) government actions by the administration’s own departments. NatSec judges’ guilty verdict for Jimmy Lai gets the treatment. Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau chief Erick Tsang – apparently already aware of the sentence due to be delivered in another month or 10 – says Lai will have ‘endless imprisonment’…
Secretary for Housing Winnie Ho, on her own Facebook page, said that the court’s ruling sent a “clear message” that any acts that undermine national security will be dealt with in accordance with the law, and those who break the law will face consequences. Her bureau does not have a Facebook page.
The Transport and Logistics Bureau said: “Attempts to use external forces to interfere in Hong Kong’s affairs will ultimately harm the general public. Without a stable society, economic prosperity and people’s livelihoods cannot be achieved.”
The Labour and Welfare Bureau, Environment and Ecology Bureau, Innovation, Technology and Industry Bureau, Health Bureau, Home and Youth Affairs Bureau, Commerce and Economic Development Bureau, Development Bureau, and Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau all released similar statements hailing the ruling on Monday.
Under the principle of cabinet collective responsibility (or ‘democratic centralism’ for all the Leninists out there), these are statements of the obvious: government bureaus do not have minds or opinions of their own. Often, public bodies and even private-sector companies join in this staged cheerleading (for example, welcoming new NatSec laws or urging people to vote). Will we see every university or property developer issue a statement lauding this particular court judgement?
The government blasts the HK Journalists Association for not following the official line…
The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) came under fire from the government on Tuesday, saying it had conducted the “subversive work of brainwashing” youngsters. The criticism came a day after the group expressed “utmost regret” over Lai’s conviction in the city’s first foreign collusion case.
A government spokesperson criticised the government-registered press union as lacking credibility, legitimacy and representation. It was “contemptible” that the group claimed it represented the news industry, when it refused to disclose its executive committee members list, they said.
The HKJA and “anti-China” foreign media “ignored” and “did not respect” the verdict in Lai’s case, which was handed down based on the law and evidence, the government said. They tried to “conceal” Lai’s crimes, and slandered the Hong Kong government, the spokesperson said, without naming any outlets.
“The SAR government strongly urges the HKJA and these anti-China foreign media to recognise the facts as soon as possible… immediately give up doing any form of subversive work of brainwashing on young people in the SAR. The SAR absolutely does not tolerate any behaviour that incites the public to turn their backs on their country and harm the interests of the citizens,” the statement in Chinese read.
Why such sensitivity about what a group ‘lacking credibility, legitimacy and representation’ thinks? Someone is really, really massively pissed off that there are people out there who think the Jimmy Lai trial was a rigged farce and/or political show trial and/or assault on press freedom.
Director Kiwi Chow’s latest (Taiwan-produced) film Deadlinehas been banned from screening in Hong Kong after a four-month review by the Office for Film, Newspaper and Article Administration…
Chow said the ban was based solely on the grounds that the film was “contrary to the interests of national security,” without further explanation provided.
He added that a lawyer had advised against initiating legal action, noting that pursuing a lawsuit might not be meaningful, as an unsuccessful challenge could result in the government seeking legal costs exceeding HK$1 million.
Expressing sadness and anger over the decision, Chow said the ban prevented the film from being shown in his home city. “I look forward to the day when Deadline is screened publicly in Hong Kong,” he added.
It has been speculated that the decision may be linked to Chow’s previous work on politically sensitive documentaries and films, including Ten Years and Revolution of Our Times.
Jimmy Lai found guilty of endangering national security by colluding with foreign forces, and sedition. HKFPreport. And all other HKFPstories on the case.
There is no good publicity for Hong Kong in this – just a display of power.
Former media tycoon Jimmy Lai “never wavered” in his push to destabilise the governance of the ruling Communist Party and continued to call for sanctions — albeit in a “less explicit way” — even after the National Security Law came into effect, the High Court ruled in his national security trial.
The court’s meticulous approach, evidenced by an 855-page verdict citing over 2,000 pieces of evidence, underscores the severity and judicial rigor applied.
(See the bottom of page 3 for a graphic showing Lai’s emails and meetings with foreigners.)
The government responds to overseas critics at 1.53 this morning…
The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government yesterday (December 15) expressed strong dissatisfaction with and opposition to the United States (US) and western countries, anti-China media, organisations and politicians for their malicious attacks, false statements, and smears against the HKSAR which totally disregarded the rule of law, following the court’s conviction judgment in Lai Chee-ying’s case, which was made strictly in accordance with the law and evidence.
A HKSAR Government spokesperson said, “these biased statements and malicious smears from external forces precisely reflect that the national security risks we face are real. External forces showed no respect in the HKSAR court’s independent judgment of the case, which had been made on the basis of facts and evidence. They also refused to acknowledge the evidence set out in the reasons for verdict, and refused to understand the court’s considerations and rationale for the verdict. Instead, they wantonly launched attacks, slandered and attacked the HKSAR Government, which was clearly a case of politics trumping the law. With the external forces distorting facts and confounding right and wrong, their malicious intentions are clearly revealed. We must sternly denounce their wrongdoings to set the record straight.”
The court’s conviction verdict was entirely free from any political considerations.
Beijing’s Foreign Ministry also issues a statement. The Ministry’s Hong Kong branch tells foreign media in the city that the case was not about press freedom…
In the letter released on Monday, the office’s spokesperson said Lai was found guilty of conspiring with external forces to endanger national security and conspiring to publish seditious publications. It clarified that Lai was not prosecuted for news reporting or expressing opinions, but for colluding with foreign forces to jeopardize national security.
The spokesperson described Lai as a key planner and participant in activities aimed at destabilizing Hong Kong and a pawn for external anti-China forces. His actions, including inciting hatred, supporting violent acts, and openly calling for foreign sanctions, constituted serious crimes under any legal system, the letter stated.
The office emphasized the trial was open and transparent, with the public, media and foreign consular officials able to observe proceedings. Lai’s legal rights were fully protected, and Hong Kong’s judicial authorities exercised independent adjudication. It also refuted allegations of inhumane treatment, stating Lai’s lawful rights are guaranteed and his health is good
Sentencing will take place next month. Perhaps not ‘life’, because it would look terrible and he is already old and in poor health. So maybe… 15 years? That should do the trick.
Jimmy Lai, the Hong Kong pro-democracy media tycoon, is facing life in prison after being found guilty of national security and sedition offences, in one of the most closely watched rulings since the city’s return to Chinese rule in 1997.
Soon after the ruling was delivered, rights and press groups decried the verdict as a “sham conviction” and an attack on press freedom.
Britain reiterated its stance that the prosecution was “politically motivated” and called for the immediate release of Lai, who is a British citizen. Lai’s conviction comes just weeks before an expected visit to Beijing by the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer.
Lai, 78, has been in jail since late 2020 on remand and serving several protest-related sentences totalling almost 10 years. Monday’s conviction, in which judges called him a “mastermind” of conspiracies designed to destabilise the Chinese government, came after a controversial trial that stretched for more than two years.
Lai appeared in the West Kowloon district court on Monday, in a grey jacket, flanked by armed guards as he sat in the glass-walled dock, as his family sat nearby. Crowds of supporters and onlookers, some of whom had queued overnight, had packed the main courtroom and several spillover rooms to see the highly anticipated – but widely predicted – verdict delivered.
Three government-vetted judges found Lai, 78, guilty of conspiring with others to collude with foreign forces to endanger national security and conspiracy to publish seditious articles. He pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Lai was arrested in August 2020 under a Beijing-imposed national security law that was implemented following massive anti-government protests in 2019. Lai has spent five years in custody, much of it in solitary confinement, and appears to have grown more frail and thinner. He has also been convicted of several lesser offenses related to fraud allegations and his actions in 2019.
Lai’s trial, conducted without a jury, has been closely monitored by the U.S., Britain, the European Union and political observers as a barometer of media freedom and judicial independence in the former British colony, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997.
…Reading from an 855-page verdict, Judge Esther Toh said that Lai had extended a “constant invitation” to the U.S. to help bring down the Chinese government with the excuse of helping Hong Kongers.
Lai’s lawyers admitted during the trial that he had called for sanctions before the law took effect, but insisted he dropped these calls to comply with the law.
But the judges ruled that Lai had never wavered in his intention to destabilize the ruling Chinese Communist Party, “continuing though in a less explicit way.”
Toh said the court was satisfied that Lai was the mastermind of the conspiracies and that Lai’s evidence was at times contradictory and unreliable. The judges ruled that the only reasonable inference from the evidence was that Lai’s only intent, both before and after the security law, was to seek the downfall of the ruling Communist Party even at the sacrifice of the people of China and Hong Kong.
[Apple Daily] angered Chinese officials with its relentless criticism of China’s ruling Communist Party and support for protest movements in Hong Kong.
When Beijing clamped down on Hong Kong protests by imposing a national-security law on the city in 2020, Lai was a target. The law has been used to imprison dozens of former opposition lawmakers and activists, effectively shutting down the pro-democracy movement.
Apple Daily closed in 2021 under pressure from Hong Kong authorities, who froze company assets, seized journalists’ computers and charged top executives under the national-security law.
…During the trial, Judge Esther Toh reprimanded Lai for referring to himself as a political prisoner, saying court rulings were based on evidence without regard for a person’s political stance.
Lai was accused of undermining China’s national security in connection with the financing of an international advertising campaign that called for sanctions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials during the 2019 protests. Lai argued that he wasn’t an organizer of the campaign and had merely provided bridge loans when crowdsourced funds were temporarily frozen.
The first Trump administration imposed sanctions in 2020 on senior Hong Kong officials including Chief Executive John Lee and on mainland Chinese officials who oversee Hong Kong. Prosecutors argued that they didn’t need to prove that there was a direct connection between those sanctions and lobbying by Lai and others.
Lai backed the imposition of sanctions in articles, social media and online video chats he conducted after Apple Daily closed in 2021, the court said. The prosecution cited Lai’s international contacts, including meetings with former Vice President Mike Pence and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as evidence intended to show that Lai had influence abroad.
Lai was also convicted of the publication of dozens of what the prosecution described as seditious articles that attacked government authorities. Hong Kong’s colonial-era sedition law was revived as part of the legal campaign against dissent that followed the 2019 protests.
The founder of the now-shut Apple Daily newspaper has been behind bars since 2020, with his case widely criticized as an example of eroding political freedoms under the national security law Beijing imposed on Hong Kong following huge and sometimes violent pro-democracy protests in 2019.
Prosecutors said Lai, 78, was the mastermind behind two conspiracies to ask foreign countries to impose “sanctions or blockade” or take “hostile activities” against Hong Kong or China, and accused him of publishing materials they said “excited disaffection” against the government.
“There is no doubt that (Lai) had harboured his resentment and hatred of the PRC for many of his adult years, and this is apparent in his articles,” Judge Esther Toh told the court, using the acronym of the People’s Republic of China.
“It is also clear to us that the first defendant has from an early stage, long before the National Security Law, been applying his mind as to what leverage the U.S. could use against the PRC,” she said, referring to Lai.
Lai, wearing a light green cardigan and gray jacket, looked impassive as he listened to the verdicts with folded arms, and did not speak.
…The British government has repeatedly described the prosecution of Lai, a British citizen, as “politically motivated.”
The Committee to Protect Journalists condemned Monday’s ruling as a “sham conviction.”
“The ruling underscores Hong Kong’s utter contempt for press freedom, which is supposed to be protected under the city’s mini-constitution, the Basic Law,” CPJ Asia-Pacific Director Beh Lih Yi said in a statement.
…Lai looked thinner than when he first entered custody, and some of the dozens of supporters who gathered at dawn in front of West Kowloon court building expressed concern for his well-being.
“I really want to see what’s happening with ‘the boss,’ to see if his health has deteriorated,” said Tammy Cheung, who worked at Lai’s newspaper for nearly two decades.
His daughter Claire said last week that Lai, a diabetic, had “lost a very significant amount of weight” and showed nail and teeth decay during his long imprisonment.
In delivering their verdict, judges said there was “no doubt that (Lai) had harbored his resentment and hatred of the PRC … for many of his adult years.”
Lai’s trial came to be widely seen as yet another test of judicial independence for Hong Kong’s courts, which have been accused of toeing Beijing’s line since 2019, when it tightened its control over the city.
Hong Kong authorities insist the rule of law is intact but critics point to the hundreds of protesters and activists who have been jailed under the NSL – and its nearly 100% conviction rate as of May this year.
Bail is also often denied in NSL cases and that was the case with Lai too, despite rights groups and Lai’s children raising concerns about his deteriorating health. He has reportedly been held in solitary confinement.
Lai’s son Sebastien told the BBC earlier this year that his father’s “body is breaking down” – “Given his age, given his health… he will die in prison.”
The Hong Kong government has also been criticised for barring foreign lawyers from working on NSL cases without prior permission. They said it was a national security risk, although foreign lawyers had operated in the city’s courts for decades. Subsequently Lai was denied his choice of lawyer, who was based in the UK.
The HK Democratic Party decides to disband. (You mean it hadn’t already?) Reuters report via Guardianhere. Meanwhile…
An opinion piece in the Diplomat on the Hong Kong government’s reaction to the Tai Po fire…
…Instead of demonstrating accountability and responsiveness to public concern, authorities have adopted a defensive posture centered on political security.
Many observers see the official handling of the aftermath as another sign that Hong Kong is becoming more like mainland China. In reality, the situation is more troubling. Hong Kong has weakened its own accountability mechanisms without acquiring the governance tools that operate in the mainland.
…From the outset, the government’s approach to the fire was highly politicized and combative.
…The government … moved quickly to cast expressions of public concern as a security threat. The National Security Office warned of “hostile forces” using the disaster to disrupt Hong Kong, framing individuals who voiced dissatisfaction as “distorting the efforts of the government.”
…In today’s Hong Kong, public sentiment and civic engagement are treated as potential security concerns. While the situation in Hong Kong is often described as resembling that in the mainland, this comparison overlooks crucial distinctions. Despite the authoritarian system under Beijing’s rule, mainland authorities do possess institutional mechanisms that absorb public pressure and enforce administrative responsibility in ways Hong Kong currently does not.
…Instead of demonstrating administrative responsibility, the Hong Kong government’s primary tools were centered on information control and political containment.
…Many of [Hong Kong’s] key accountability mechanisms were designed and institutionalized during the final decades of British rule, when the colonial government sought to develop Hong Kong into a prosperous global city grounded in professionalism, public accountability, and the rule of law. For instance, the Commissions of Inquiry Ordinance, enacted in 1968, was designed precisely to handle major incidents requiring independent scrutiny. The Legislative Council also possessed meaningful powers to investigate official misconduct under the Powers and Privileges Ordinance.
These mechanisms, however, can function effectively only in a political environment that favors checks and balances…
…Hong Kong has hollowed out the institutional mechanisms that once ensured accountability and effective governance, but it has not developed the structures that support stability in mainland China. The result is a governance vacuum, in which neither democratic nor authoritarian accountability functions effectively.
…As a Special Administrative Region, senior officials are appointed by and report directly to Beijing. Any admission of administrative error thus risks reflecting poorly on the central government’s oversight. The political cost is even higher today, as Beijing has constructed a narrative of having restored stability and governance effectiveness in Hong Kong following recent crackdowns. Acknowledging serious failures by the city’s government would undermine the rationale for its post-2019 political restructuring.
…The Tai Po fire … exposed deeper structural problems in Hong Kong’s current governance model. The city has moved away from the institutional traditions that once made it administratively credible, yet it cannot adapt the mechanisms that enable mainland China to maintain stability through performance and accountability.
As long as Beijing values the appearance of “One Country, Two Systems,” Hong Kong will not be able to replicate the mainland’s approach to crisis governance. But without rebuilding its own institutions of transparency and responsibility, the city risks further erosion of public trust and administrative capacity.
Hong Kong is not becoming more like mainland China. It is becoming something more fragile and less capable of governing itself effectively.
In other words, Hong Kong either needs to go back to its old ‘high degree of autonomy’ (the core of post-1997 ‘One Country, Two Systems’) – or extend Mainland-style controls, such as widespread censorship of the Internet and foreign media.
The first isn’t going to happen under Beijing’s current leadership (see an interview with Minxin Pei on China’s trend to more authoritarianism). The second means giving up any claim to being an international business/cultural/etc hub, leaving Hong Kong simply a Mainland city with some niche sidelines thanks to the absence of capital controls.
The government’s decision to focus on ‘defensive political security’ as soon as volunteers and activists emerged after the Tai Po fire was perhaps a good example of why English needs a word for ‘shocking but not surprising’.
It looks like underworked but eager locally based Mainland national security officials swiftly stepped in and ordered local counterparts into action. If anyone sincerely believes ‘black-clad colour revolutions’ exist and pose an imminent threat, this might make sense. (Maybe someone does.) But even some pro-government figures must be cringing in embarrassment at the response itself and the way it backfired. Rather than prioritize empathy, which should have been natural and relatively easy, the authorities portrayed volunteers and activists – and by extension much of the broader community – as a possible enemy. Predictably, overseas media picked up on that and made it a big story. Next thing, the authorities are denouncing them as ‘anti-China’.
It would have been so easy to avoid such a PR mess in the old days – but now it’s almost inevitable. Until/unless the authorities take full control over the Internet and ban the foreign press.
The ‘anti-China’ coverage keeps coming. From Timothy McLaughlin in the Atlantic…
As the housing market generated greater wealth for Hong Kong’s tycoons, the construction and real-estate industries achieved growing immunity from regulatory oversight. Government deference, in turn, allowed corruption and corner cutting to proliferate, particularly among contractors involved in renovating the city’s limited housing stock.
This dynamic most likely played a key role in last month’s fire.
…Last weekend, authorities summoned international media organizations to an in-person meeting with national-security officials, who issued an apparent threat about spreading “false information and smear campaigns,” according to a statement from the Office for Safeguarding National Security. “Don’t say that you weren’t warned,” an official who declined to give his name told the assembled journalists.
…[Beijing’s] fear of history [mourning after Hu Yaobang’s death in 1989] repeating may explain the absurd accusation from a Hong Kong spokesperson that recent gatherings of mourners at memorial sites were really the work of “foreign” forces seeking to “maliciously smear” the government’s relief efforts. Beijing’s national-security office in Hong Kong claimed that bad actors were using the tragedy to revive “protest memories” of the city’s 2019 pro-democracy demonstrations and possibly launch “another ‘color revolution.’”
In a recent Twitter thread (starts here), McLaughlin refers to earlier public discontent over property tycoons and the construction industry…
Remember, this was all supposed to be fixed by Beijing after the imposition of the national security law, helped in part by the fact that the pesky pro-democracy lawmakers would be out of the way.
How is that working out?
Writing this as the LegCo election happened it is clear that the 7th LegCo session will be seen as a transition, or bridge, between the old LegCo and a new truly patriots only chamber. Some of the old guard, [Abraham] Shek etc., were told not to run in 2021, now the old guard is truly gone.
The next big Hong Kong story for the overseas media will feature trials without juries and appointed NatSec judges and starts at 10am today: after 1,800 days in prison – the Jimmy Lai verdict, which everyone expects to be ‘guilty’ .
At first, the big Hong Kong disaster story in the international media was the Tai Po fire itself. Then it became the authorities’ attempts to sideline or suppress volunteers and activists. The way this is going, overseas press reports will soon be about how Hong Kong sees overseas press reports as a hostile foreign anti-China plot. It’s getting to the stage where the focus of the Hong Kong government’s message-management effort is defending its message-management effort.
This is so self-defeating and could so easily have been avoided. Just ask yourself ‘what would the Tung Chee-hwa or Donald Tsang administrations have done differently?’ Even Carrie Lam just six years ago tried to get PR help. Instead…
A government press release attacks a range of sinister-sounding, but not well-defined, enemies…
The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) today (December 3) strongly disapproved and rejected foreign forces, including anti-China media organisations, and anti-China and destabilising forces for not just making unfounded and slanderous remarks regarding the HKSAR Government’s relief work on and investigations into the fire at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po, but also for their sowing of discord and malicious attack on the rescue operations. Those who try to use the disaster to stir up chaos in society are malicious, blotting out the efforts of the HKSAR Government and of all sectors of the community in the rescue operations and support work. Those people should be condemned.
(The first sentence perhaps refers to reports on official treatment of grassroots voluntary groups and on activists’ fears of a cover-up. But who knows?)
…”Regrettably, foreign forces and anti-China and destabilising forces with ulterior motives, through disseminating fake news and false messages on the Internet, and even distributing seditious pamphlets, etc., intended to maliciously smear the rescue work, instigate social division and conflict to undermine the society’s unity in taking forward the support and relief work. It even causes ‘secondary damage’ to the affected residents. If these acts are left unchecked, not only would they negatively impact on the relief work after the fire, they would even undermine the stability of society and endanger national security. We must not let our guard down against such risks.”
HKFPreports that Beijing’s local NatSec office sees threats all over the place…
Beijing’s Office for Safeguarding National Security (OSNS) has again warned that foreign forces which are alleged to have attacked, and incited opposition to, the Tai Po fire rescue and relief efforts will be pursued. It is the second such statement in a week, neither of which named any groups or individuals.
The office said on Wednesday that a small group of “hostile external forces” had attempted to stir up opposition in the city under the pretext of “petitioning for the people,” amid the relief work at Wang Fuk Court, where a massive fire last Wednesday claimed at least 159 lives.
Without providing details, the office said these forces had “added fuel to the fire” by “splashing dirty water on the SAR government and rescue personnel.” It accused them of “erasing” the efforts of the Hong Kong government and various sectors, and of “insulting” the city’s “Lion Rock spirit” – a reference to resilience.
The office further alleged that the same forces sought to “copy the playbook” of the 2019 extradition bill protests and “control” foreign agents in the city: “There are still people who attempt to provoke the public to rekindle ‘protest memories,’ creating undercurrents to disrupt Hong Kong and launch another ‘colour revolution’,” the statement said in Chinese.
A BBC video asks whether Hong Kong can manage the aftermath of the fire the way Beijing wants. (Clearly it can. The real question is whether it should.)
An opinion piece by Michael Mo in the Diplomat echoes much of the international coverage over the last week…
Despite the spin by the officials, the colossal failure of regulatory oversight across governmental departments is clear, especially in dealing with bid rigging in building maintenance contracts …The Buildings Department, the city’s building regulator, has the authority to inspect these maintenance projects, but rarely does so proactively.
Before the two national security laws, Hong Kong’s civil society had been serving as an imperfect guardrail to these malpractices. The pro-democracy parties assisted homeowners in vetting questionable maintenance contractors on a regular basis, with prodemocracy district councillors raising residents’ concerns to relevant government department officials in district councils. Free and independent media, such as Jimmy Lai’s Apple Daily and Next Magazine, exposed the substandard projects and corruption cases, and FactWire created a database of building maintenance contracts.
These imperfect guardrails could have prevented the tragedy from happening – but they have all been destroyed under the national security regime.
Troublingly, it is also unclear what Mr Lee’s commission will achieve. It lacks the power to summon witnesses or to declare criminal liability. Regina Ip, a pro-government lawmaker, suggests it will “produce outcomes sooner”. But critics wonder whether it will enable the authorities to have more sway over the findings.
Instead the government’s main priority seems to be maintaining public order ahead of elections to the Legislative Council on December 7th. It is only the second time such elections have been held since the central government in Beijing restricted participation in them to “patriots”—cheerleaders for China’s Communist Party. Hong Kong officials had been coaxing residents to vote even before the fire. The first election, in December 2021, saw a record-low turnout of 30.2%, which was widely considered a quiet protest against the electoral overhaul.
“Turnout will be lower than originally desired,” predicts Ms Ip, whose New People’s Party is fielding eight candidates. That will displease the governments in Hong Kong and Beijing: both want a hearty turnout to endow the vote with a veneer of legitimacy. Instead it may offer insight into the depth of anger over the blaze.
Hailey Cheng has closed the website she launched to document the Tai Po fire…
In response to the Hong Kong SAR Government’s call, I hereby state clearly that I will not have any association with any foreign forces or individuals alleged to be undermining social stability, and I have fully ceased any contact that could be misconstrued.
On other local matters…
The ICAC – an anti-corruption agency – announces more arrests for ‘inciting’ others not to vote, even though not voting is perfectly legal.
The ICAC today (December 4) arrested four men for allegedly reposting an online post or leaving comments on social media platforms to incite others not to vote or to cast invalid votes at the 2025 Legislative Council General Election (LegCo Election) during the election period, in contravention of section 27A of the Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Conduct) Ordinance (ECICO). The ICAC had earlier charged three other individuals with the offence in relation to the current LegCo Election.
Jimmy Lai’s children complain about his healthcare in jail…
Lai, a diabetic, has been kept in solitary confinement without air conditioning in a jail where summer temperatures rise to 44 Celsius (111 Fahrenheit), his children said.
“He has lost a very significant amount of weight, visibly, and he is a lot weaker than he was before,” said his daughter Claire Lai, who left Hong Kong after seeing her father several months ago.
“His nails turn almost purple, gray and greenish before they fall off, and his teeth are getting rotten,” she told AFP on a visit to Washington, where the family is seeking to rally support for her father.
The reports “seek to smear the [Hong Kong government] by misleading the public into believing that the custodial and medical arrangements” for Lai have been “poor,” the statement said.
“Their despicable intent to vilify Hong Kong’s rule of law is blatant and violates the professional conduct of journalists.”
From David Webb – remand (presumed innocent) prisoners in jail in Hong Kong now account for a record 42.0% of all Correctional Services detainees.
And away from Hong Kong…
Taiwanese rocker Freddy Lim is now a diplomat posted to Finland. A video of him engaging in non-consular duties. (Band ChthoniC includes his wife on bass.)
For prehistory fans – gruesome finds showing how Europe’s first extensive farming culture 7,000 years ago apparently collapsed amid mass-decapitations. As so often, archaeologists postulate ‘rituals’ by way of explanation.
While the Hong Kong government engages in heavy-handed attempts to silence anyone ‘sabotaging’ society after the Tai Po disaster, international media wade in (some links are paywalled).
At least 151 died as flames engulfed high-rise towers at Hong Kong’s Wang Fuk Court housing complex last week. The official response shows how this once free city is becoming more like mainland China by the day.
Authorities are seeking to chill speech related to the fire. Several civil-society figures had planned to hold a news conference Tuesday to discuss the response to the blaze. But the event was cancelled after one participant, solicitor Bruce Liu, was “invited to a meeting” with national-security police, the local press reports. Mr. Liu, former chair of the pro-democracy Association for Democracy and People’s Livelihood, reportedly left the police station later Tuesday.
…Hong Kongers have legitimate questions about what went so lethally awry. Before the blaze, residents of Wang Fuk Court had repeatedly raised safety concerns, and authorities now say some of the protective mesh around the buildings failed to meet flame-retardant standards. Other reports describe flammable construction materials and faulty alarms.
A decade ago the scrappy reporters at the Apple Daily newspaper might have followed up on residents’ complaints and exposed wrongdoing before tragedy struck.
…There’s early evidence of government shortcomings. Hong Kong’s Labor Department had told Wang Fuk Court residents that the fire risks were “relatively low,” Reuters reports. Hong Kong’s Fire Services Department conducts inspections and can take enforcement actions regarding fire safety at construction sites. Where were they?
By the way, the fire department is a subordinate agency of Hong Kong’s Security Bureau, and the bureau’s Secretary is Chris Tang, who is also in charge of implementing the national-security law that outlaws dissent. On Saturday Beijing warned “anti-China and pro-chaos elements who attempt to ‘use disasters to disrupt Hong Kong’” would be “severely punished” under the same law. Hong Kongers have little recourse as authorities tolerate neither scrutiny nor criticism.
The authorities quickly arrested critics demanding accountability, signaling an expansive use of the security law to silence dissent over nonpolitical tragedies.
Hong Kong’s deadliest fire in decades had barely been extinguished when the city’s authorities began working to contain something else: public anger at the government.
…Over the weekend, Beijing’s national security office in Hong Kong issued a statement warning of consequences for “anti-China elements” who are looking to use the fire, which started last Wednesday and lasted more than 24 hours, “to cause trouble.”
“They have lost their humanity, disregarded facts, spread false information, maliciously attacked” the Hong Kong government’s efforts, the statement said.
…“If the committee is seen to not be independent, that will only further disillusion people who are currently dissatisfied,” said Stuart Hargreaves, an associate professor of law at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
…The law has also made it risky for local journalists to conduct investigative reporting, for lawyers to analyze the government’s legal liability, and for activists to organize street demonstrations demanding transparency.
“The lesson the party drew from Tiananmen is: You cannot wait for events to escalate,” said Minxin Pei, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College. “Problems must be crushed at the earliest stage.”
Disasters, he explained, pose a unique threat to authoritarian governments because they solve the two classic obstacles to collective action: motivation and coordination. People are already angry, and they know where to gather. That is why the party focuses so intensely on the first 48 to 72 hours after a tragedy, when emotions are raw and solidarity is easiest to form. The goal is not simply to respond to the crisis but to pre-empt the possibility of collective expression.
The Hong Kong government’s response to the fire has followed this script with precision. The detention of the university student, the official “warning” visit to the site and the ominous national security statement happened shortly after the fire was put out. The student’s detention can be interpreted as striking at anyone who stands out.
…Thousands of people queued for hours to lay flowers at the complex. Volunteers delivered supplies, raised funds and assembled resources for the displaced. Journalists and citizens documented not only human stories but also the government’s response. Experts offered assessments of possible causes, gaps in oversight and policy failures.
None of this resembled the “anti-China, anti-Hong Kong” conspiracy that the authorities claimed was lurking in the shadows. It looked instead like a community doing what communities everywhere do in moments of crisis: grieve, help out and insist that the dead be honored and the living protected.
The Chinese and Hong Kong governments are “terrified of anything that can generate a sense of collective identity or bring people together around the idea that this is our city, our loss, our grief,” said Chung Ching Kwong, a Hong Kong activist and senior analyst at the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, an international alliance of parliamentarians.
Interviews with roughly a dozen residents and homeowners, as well as a review of project documents, show a series of missed opportunities to prevent the tragedy. They include several that have been previously unreported, such as misleading statements by the contractor and an appeal in early 2024 for the Independent Commission Against Corruption — Hong Kong’s anti-graft agency — to investigate the company. That’s on top of moves by residents to replace the homeowners’ committee that oversaw the bidding process, seek action from the Labour Department and alert local media about their concerns.
Outrage over the catastrophe now threatens to rekindle dissent the Communist Party has devoted the past six years to eradicating, with Chief Executive John Lee under pressure to deliver justice while also preventing the kind of mass street protests that erupted back in 2019. Growing calls for him to establish an independent inquiry — echoing the “five demands” that galvanized demonstrators back then — are testing the extent to which Hong Kong’s separate legal system is being transformed by Beijing’s playbook, which seeks to quell public anger without a transparent investigation.
…Luk Yu Yeung, who lost his 71-year-old mother in the fire, posted the four demands from the petition on X on Monday, after his mother’s body was found. “These demands are actually very basic and simple,” he said by phone. “These are things they should be doing — they shouldn’t need to be told.”
…The fire has shone a spotlight on persistent social tensions in one of the world’s most unequal cities, where millions of people cram into tiny apartments as the government restricts land available for housing, giving local billionaire family developers outsized market power. That’s driven up property prices and squeezed together high-rises like those at Wang Fuk Court, where the towers stood as little as 7.5 meters (25 feet) apart — even less with the bamboo scaffolding, which allowed the fire to quickly jump from one building to the next.
…In a statement to Bloomberg, the Labour Department said the objective of its inspections was to assess whether conditions at the construction site posed any safety risk to workers. “The materials used to seal windows in residential units are generally not a priority in our inspections,” it said.
Democracy is vital not only because our rights should be protected, but also because the mechanisms of checks and balances, and division of powers, builds resilience against those in power misbehaving. The collapse of political diversity and the rise of authoritarian governance come with consequences much more far-reaching than the imprisonment of political figures.
In the face of the tragedy, people demand answers about why so many safety procedures and warnings are being ignored. There should not only be arrests of advisors and contractors, but also a truly independent investigation, expanding the scope for civil actors to hold the government accountable.
The blaze … did more than destroy homes. It revived one of Hong Kong’s most visceral fears; that lives can be reduced to collateral in a system that no longer listens.
What should have been a moment of collective mourning instead widened the fracture between Hongkongers demanding accountability and a government increasingly shaped by Beijing’s doctrine that sovereignty sits above all else.
…Hong Kong’s housing crisis has long fed collective anxiety, but this disaster struck its deepest nerve. In a city where ordinary families already struggle with extremely unaffordable flats, even the illusion of safety can no longer be taken for granted.
The sense of betrayal deepened when Beijing issued a warning not to let “a disaster disrupt Hong Kong”, reinforcing the belief that the state prioritised protecting its authority, not its people.
…Under the national security regime, the line between civic action and political threat has blurred beyond recognition.
What used to be routine — filing complaints, demanding accountability, launching petitions, helping neighbours — now carries an implied risk.
Beijing’s insistence that sovereignty cannot be challenged has reshaped even the vocabulary of disaster. A call for answers can be reframed as agitation. Grief can be interpreted as defiance. Volunteerism can be treated as “gathering”.
This worldview stands in stark contrast to Hong Kong’s own political culture, shaped over decades by courts that earned public trust, an investigative tradition that valued transparency, and a society that once expected — even demanded — accountability from those in power.
Hong Kong is now following the same cycle [as the authorities after the 2022 Urumqi fire] —not solving the problems but targeting the people who speak out about them. Lee Ka-chiu, Hong Kong’s chief executive, has defended himself during the crisis, rejecting criticism of failings in light of his promise to lead Hong Kong “from chaos to order.”
…this shows how much Hong Kong’s freedom of speech and assembly has eroded, as the government appears to fear both the truth about the disaster and the solidarity it has raised among the people.
Long story short: it looks like, following the fire in Tai Po, Beijing officials swiftly assumed control of the Hong Kong government’s messaging/narrative and ‘guidance’ of public opinion/discourse. To people who think this approach prevents ‘colour revolutions’, it might seem worth it. Others might wonder if a more relaxed and empathic response would have been more helpful
Universities are entering into the panicky spirit. An HKFPreport on Baptist U says…
The signs on the student message board said: “Deep condolences to the deceased from the great fire of Wang Fuk Court. We are Hongkongers. We urge the government to heed public concerns. Respond to public’s requests. Justice must be served.”
…Posts on Threads and Reddit appeared to show the sign being slowly boarded up throughout the day.
The plastic barriers had signs on them that read “temporary material storage zone,” and “work in progress.”
Removing the poster would be seen as censorship and/or provocative or an infringement of academic freedom – but paying a crew to move large barriers in front of the wall and claiming it’s about routine work is merely pathetic, which is OK (presumably).
The SCMPexplains something everyone has long known about…
Hong Kong’s worst blaze in seven decades has exposed an ugly open secret of a murky and rapacious building renovation business that is plagued by bid-rigging and skyrocketing costs even as it staves off feeble official efforts to tackle collusive conduct.
Experts and former insiders offered this grim assessment, pointing to the city as a gold mine for such syndicates given its ageing stock of high-rise properties ripe for renovation.
They made a collective call for an overhaul of the industry as the government announced on Tuesday an independent committee to investigate the cause of the deadly fire at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po – which has claimed 156 lives so far – and to review systemic problems, including alleged bid-rigging.
When the inferno tore through the Tai Po renovation site in Hong Kong on Nov. 26, the flames consumed more than the homes of the thousands residing in Wang Fuk Court. They revealed the deeper rot beneath Hong Kong’s governance — years of corner-cutting, collusion and censorship wrapped in the language of progress and stability.
…Concerns about how such contracts are awarded are not new. In 2017, investigative outlet FactWire used tender data to identify irregular, “rotating” bidding patterns among several major contractors in Hong Kong, including [Wang Fuk Court renovation contractor] Prestige, across at least 13 residential refurbishment projects. The reporting showed these patterns as consistent with bid-rigging schemes, where pre-selected firms alternate winning bids while keeping outsiders at bay and prices high. FactWire closed in 2022 amid mounting pressure under Hong Kong’s National Security Law. When institutions capable of exposing collusion are dismantled, risks do not disappear; they accumulate quietly in concrete, wiring and facade systems.
…Arresting a few mid-level site managers may satisfy public anger temporarily, but it leaves untouched the chain of political and bureaucratic negligence above them.
…Volunteer groups quickly organized relief and donated supplies in the area. The founder of a petition demanding thorough independent investigation and support for affected residents was soon questioned by national security police. What began as an act of compassion became treated as subversion.
…The “bamboo problem” is not just a weak explanation; it functions as a tool of cognitive warfare. Its purpose is to guide the public toward forgetting — either to forget the Tai Po fire entirely once the news cycle moves on, or to forget who was actually responsible and treat it as something closer to a natural disaster than an engineered failure.
…the timing of the election is awkward nonetheless, because it highlights the degree to which Hong Kongers have little say in how they are governed just as serious questions are being raised by the Wang Fuk Court fire about government oversight and responsiveness.
…The dilemma the government faces is one of its own doing. By revamping elections to be “patriots only,” the authorities have removed a potential release valve for public anger. They have also lost a vital source of accountability and responsiveness, particularly at the local level, where fully-elected District Councils have been replaced by largely appointed bodies run by government bureaucrats, and “care teams” akin to mainland China’s red-armband-wearing neighbourhood watch organizations.
In the past, district councillors and elected members of Hong Kong’s legislature were easily accessible, often distributing their WhatsApp numbers to all residents in their constituency, and sending out newsletters detailing the work they were doing. Many ousted former councillors have been involved in the Wang Fuk Court fire response, organizing on the ground and online.
By comparison, representatives of the new system feel to many like extensions of the government, equally distant and unaccountable.
Local media reported on Tuesday that Bruce Liu, a solicitor and former chair of the Association for Democracy and People’s Livelihood (ADPL), was taken in by the police force’s national security department.
Shortly before Liu was taken in, organisers of the event sent a statement to media, including HKFP, saying: “The civil society press conference scheduled for 3pm today regarding Hong Kong’s high-rise building maintenance policy has been cancelled due to notification from relevant departments.”
The cancellation notice was sent out less than four hours before the event was scheduled to be held.
The press conference would have covered topics including support for affected residents, the establishment of a commission of inquiry, potential bid-rigging, substandard materials, and the roles of regulatory bodies including the government.
Other speakers at the press conference included Kwok Wai-shing and Jay Li, both of the ADPL, as well as town planner and former opposition Democratic Party member Stanley Ng.
The government is allowed to hold press conferences. And it uses one to announce an independent inquiry in the Tai Po fire. (Unlike Miles Kwan, the government is also allowed to call for an independent inquiry.) Then again, it is an ‘independent review committee’, which is not the same thing…
…An independent review committee differs from a commission of inquiry, which has been established five times since 1997 under the Commissions of Inquiry Ordinance to investigate matters of public importance.
Although both are chaired by a judge, a commission of inquiry has a high level of independence and extensive investigative powers. It can summon anyone to attend and give evidence, receive and consider materials that might not be admissible in standard court proceedings, and punish any contempt of the commission, such as refusing to answer questions.
…By contrast, an independent review committee was set up for other issues … including [in 2012]…
to review rules to prevent potential conflicts of interest, following a series of allegations.
…Those reviews focused on the regulatory framework and monitoring system.
Kevin Yam claims a review committee will be ‘toothless’.
Can’t see AFP being allowed to ask questions at government press conferences again after this one. Transcript here. HKFPreports on the CE’s comments…
Hong Kong will not tolerate those who “exploit” the fatal Tai Po fire and “sabotage” society’s effort to support the victims, chief executive John Lee has said, following three reported arrests for alleged sedition.
…Asked about the arrests on Tuesday, Lee said: “I will not tolerate any crimes, in particular crimes that exploit the tragedy that we are facing now.”
“Society [and] everybody in Hong Kong are uniting to help those who suffer… Anybody who dares to sabotage this attempt, this commitment of society, we will do anything we can to ensure that justice will be done.”
How do petitions or concerned citizens’ press conferences ‘sabotage’ anything? Do the authorities expect everyone to pretend the tragedy hasn’t happened? What are they afraid of? This isn’t how you win public trust.
From literary journal Cha, an eloquent piece by Stuart Lau Wai-shing, translated by Tammy Ho Lai-ming…
When I saw, beyond the police cordon, the platform where survivors of the Wang Fuk Court fire had gathered, I watched them staring at their own homes as they burned. Some cried out that they had lost contact with their families. Some covered their eyes, unable to bear the sight, yet still peered anxiously through their fingers, tears blotting the gaps between them. In those eyes one saw not only sorrow but desolation, anger, and self-reproach. These emotions weigh heavily for the people of Tai Po, and empathy renders them piercingly clear. Yet have any officials perceived them? Are they reduced to nothing but “mouths”, given only to sophistry and evasion?
…During my run this morning I saw police driving away the volunteers and the Care Teams taking full control of the collected goods, treating those who had hurried to aid the victims as though they were thieves. The absurdity of it left me dazed, as if I had strayed into another land…
LegCo election to go ahead, apparently. Millions rejoice. It would be interesting to know what officials thought when making the decision. Did they wonder whether public opinion would see sticking to the schedule soon after the Tai Po fire as disrespectful or callous? Were they concerned that postponement would make the polls look expendable? Did they worry that turnout might be lower if (say) voters stayed away as a form of protest? Or did they calculate that voters would be even more exhausted by prolonged promotional campaigns?
Or maybe they just went by the book. The CE can postpone an election for two weeks for public safety reasons (like a major typhoon). Anything longer would require the use of emergency powers.
Normally, HK law enforcement officers LOVE to have the media swarm around the vehicle taking arrested persons out of the station and have the media take as many photos and videos as they want.
…But if one looks closely at this video [here] of Miles Kwan leaving the police station, one will see that the HK police made all efforts to try and stop the media from filming. They only failed because they underestimated the size of the media contingent present at the scene.
Peggy Wong distances herself. (Why do these people all have that ‘DAB look’?)
How could fire alarms be disabled for a housing estate of over 4,600 residents? If the government enforced safety standards as necessary, could this have been prevented in the first place? How is the government not more concerned with the underlying series of oversights that have led to this tragedy?
National security police have arrested a former district councillor and a volunteer for allegedly attempting to incite discord through comments about the Wang Fuk Court fire in Tai Po that has killed 146 people and injured 79.
Former district councillor Kenneth Cheung Kam-hung was arrested at his Fanling residence around 7pm Sunday, while a surnamed Lee female volunteer was also detained in the operation conducted by national security officers.
The demands by [Miles] Kwan and other organisers turned into an online petition that gained more than 10,000 signatures in less than a day.
However, Hong Kong media reported on Saturday night that Kwan was arrested by national security police on suspicion of sedition and the text of the online petition had been deleted, showing how, under Beijing’s watchful eye, dissenting voices in Hong Kong can vanish as quickly as they appear.
…Hong Kong has previously used judge-led commissions of inquiry to undertake complex fact-finding exercises in a public forum — a practice left over from British colonial rule.
By contrast, city officials have so far announced only an inter-departmental task force to investigate the blaze.
University student Miles Kwan, 24, was arrested on suspicion of trying to incite sedition in relation to the blaze in the Wang Fuk Court complex in the northern Tai Po district, the South China Morning Post reported. Hong Kong police did not respond on Sunday to a request for comment.
The online petition promoted by the group reached over 10,000 signatures by Saturday afternoon before it was closed.
A second petition with the same demands has been launched by a Tai Po resident who is now living overseas.
“Hongkongers demand the truth and justice,” wrote KY in the comment section of the new online petition.
A post from Yuen Chan saying Ta Kung Pao has deleted a recent story on corruption in the building maintenance industry.
A post linking to info about legal advice for Tai Po victims.
