you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The case against him is for collusion with foreign forces to undermine national security.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It's difficult to find information on Google because vague terms like "pro-democracy" are used leaving the readers to imagine what it means.

    I got what I told you from this Reuters article: https://www.reuters.com/world/china/national-security-trial-hong-kong-pro-democracy-tycoon-postponed-next-sept-2022-12-13/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If you're pro-democracy in an authoritarian state you kind of have to collude with foreign democracies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [–] -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    With limited information, knowing what we know about the Chinese government, I know I sure ain’t giving them the benefit of the doubt here

    Edit: interesting to see which way this sentiment swings the votes here

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 years ago* (2 children)

    It's in the headline: "pro-democracy publisher".

    He was a newspaper publisher in Hong Kong who refused to get in line. That's all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Literally ran a newspaper which espoused democracy and independent governance (Hong Kong status quo at the time).

    You might also be interested to learn that democratically elected legislators in Hong Kong were arrested en masse from the floor of their legislative building for the exact same reason. It's as bad as it sounds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    He published newspapers. He was a newspaper publisher.

    There's no free speech in China. Publishing a newspaper that doesn't follow the line of the Chinese Communist Party is a crime, and after the CCP took control over Hong Kong that applied to him as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The Jan 6 people were not arrested for publishing a newspaper.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
  • [+] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    The arrest itself was actually "motivated" by what they referred to as unauthorised assembly during the pro-democracy protests. This 73 year old man went somewhere he shouldn't have, and clearly threatened the mighty CCP enough to warrant 20 months in prison in the process. Additional charges up to life are being stacked on top following from the "security law" meant to silence pro-democracy voices in Hong Kong, but as far as I know these charges have not been made public. His newspaper was published daily though, so the nature of his crime was quite public if you're really interested.

    Here's a BBC story on the history of the newspaper.

    I'm sorry I couldn't find anything published by Xinhua News Agency, I have a feeling you might have appreciated that more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 2 years ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Authoritarians often give vague or even contradictory justifications for arresting people. Apple Daily was promoting democracy in Hong Kong which was enough for him to be made an example of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    We will never know the details of the charges, because all the legal proceedings will be secret, which is the standard in China.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments