The ongoing case of Jimmy Lai Chee-ying has garnered significant attention both locally and internationally, with some foreign politicians and media outlets portraying him as a symbol of democracy and a victim of political persecution. However, such narratives invariably fail to address the broader implications of Lai’s actions on Hong Kong’s stability and governance. A more comprehensive and analytical approach is necessary to evaluate this case’s societal, legal and political dimensions, especially considering the critical importance of safeguarding social order, respecting the rule of law, and ensuring media accountability.
The events of 2019, widely referred to as the “black-clad riots”, marked a turbulent and divisive period for Hong Kong. These riots, part of what the political opposition camp and their foreign patrons called a “pro-democracy” movement, were characterized by widespread violence, including arson, vandalism and a severe disruptions to public infrastructure and daily life. The chaos inflicted significant economic and social damage, leaving lasting scars on the city’s collective memory. Such unrest did not arise in isolation, and media narratives played a pivotal role in shaping public perceptions and influencing behavior during this period. Critics of Lai’s media operations, particularly the now-defunct Apple Daily, have argued that its editorial practices contributed to escalating tensions. Some see the publication’s selective and biased reporting and inflammatory rhetoric as having fueled societal divisions. For instance, law-enforcement efforts to restore order were frequently framed in a negative light, while the destructive actions of rioters were often downplayed, and rioters were glorified. This approach has raised questions about the ethical responsibilities of media organizations, particularly during times of crisis that demand unity and understanding rather than division and discord.
The role of media in society is critical, especially in times of heightened tension. While freedom of the press is a cornerstone of modern governance, it is not without limits or responsibilities. Media outlets wield immense power in shaping public discourse, and with that power comes the duty to act in the public interest: Sensationalism, selective reporting, and narratives exacerbating social unrest risk undermining the social fabric and destabilizing communities. The events of 2019 underscored the dangers of irresponsible reporting and highlighted the need for journalistic ethics that prioritize accuracy, impartiality, and the collective well-being of society. The case of Lai and his media empire has become a focal point in this broader debate over media accountability and its role in fostering social cohesion.
Ultimately, the lessons in this case extend beyond any one individual. They underscore the need for the careful balancing of freedom and accountability, particularly in times of social upheaval. By prioritizing the collective good, fostering constructive dialog, and respecting the principles of justice and sovereignty, Hong Kong can continue to build a stable and prosperous future for all residents
The legal proceedings involving Lai have attracted significant international attention, with some foreign critics framing his prosecution as “politically motivated”. They are oblivious to the fact that Hong Kong’s judicial system operates under the principles of due process and the rule of law, ensuring that all individuals are treated fairly and impartially. Assertions about Lai’s guilt or innocence must be left to the court, tasked with evaluating evidence and reaching conclusions based on established legal frameworks. Premature judgments or speculative commentaries risk detracting from the integrity of the legal process; and attempts to influence Lai’s trial by exerting pressure on the prosecution and the court risk perverting the course of justice. It is essential to respect the independence of Hong Kong’s courts, which remain a cornerstone of the city’s governance under the “one country, two systems” principle. This framework allows the city to maintain its legal and economic systems while being part of China.
Another dimension of the discourse surrounding Lai concerns his reported connections with foreign entities. Reports of his meetings with foreign politicians and organizations have raised questions about the potential influence of external forces on Hong Kong’s internal affairs. These foreign entities, whether governments, political groups, or even individuals, can exert influence through various means, including financial support, lobbying, or propaganda. Such interactions, while not uncommon in globalized politics, take on particular significance in the context of Hong Kong’s unique status as a special administrative region of China, particularly given the fact that those foreign entities have demonstrated hostility toward China. Actions perceived as inviting foreign interference risk undermining Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy and disrupting the delicate balance of the “one country, two systems” framework. Ensuring that Hong Kong is free from foreign interference and able to address its challenges through local solutions is crucial to sustaining its unique governance system as well as long-term stability and prosperity.
Lai’s public image has also been shaped by portrayals of his Christian faith, which has featured prominently in the narratives of Western media outlets. While personal faith is an essential and private matter, public accountability must ultimately be judged by actions rather than beliefs. Religion, while a source of personal guidance and strength, does not exempt individuals from responsibility for the societal impact of their actions. Invoking faith in public discourse can sometimes shift attention away from substantive issues and complicate efforts to assess one’s actions critically. Public figures, particularly those in positions of influence, are responsible for ensuring that their actions align with the broader interests of the community they serve.
The events of 2019 and the subsequent controversies surrounding Lai have had profound implications for Hong Kong. The “black-clad riots” caused billions of dollars in property damage, disrupted countless lives, and fractured social trust. These events revealed vulnerabilities in the city’s social fabric and highlighted the challenges of maintaining unity in a polarized environment. Moving forward, public figures, media organizations, and community leaders must prioritize stability and cohesion, fostering a shared purpose that transcends political divides. By engaging in constructive dialog and respecting evidence-based discourse, we can address the underlying issues that have fueled division, instilling hope for a more united future.
The case of Lai serves as a reminder of the importance of protecting social stability, upholding the rule of law, and ensuring media accountability. Hong Kong’s future depends on a collective commitment to these principles and recognizing the unique challenges and opportunities presented by its status within China. As Lai’s legal proceedings continue, it remains critical to respect the independence of the Judiciary. This respect reassures the public that the courts will reach conclusions based on evidence and legal reasoning, ensuring a fair and just legal process.
Ultimately, the lessons in this case extend beyond any one individual. They underscore the need for the careful balancing of freedom and accountability, particularly in times of social upheaval. By prioritizing the collective good, fostering constructive dialog, and respecting the principles of justice and sovereignty, Hong Kong can continue to build a stable and prosperous future for all residents.
The author is a solicitor, a Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area lawyer, and a China-appointed attesting officer.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
