Connect with us


Hong Kong: Media Tycoon Trial a Travesty



(New York) – The authorities in Hong Kong should immediately drop the baseless charges against Jimmy Lai, the pro-democracy media tycoon, and unconditionally release him and his six co-defendants, Human Rights Watch said today. Lai’s trial is scheduled to resume on December 13, 2022.

Hong Kong authorities have called on the Chinese government to change Hong Kong law to bar foreign lawyers from national security cases, denying Lai’s right to a lawyer of his choosing, and have threatened to try him in mainland China, where the courts are beholden to the Chinese Communist Party. He and the six co-defendants, who pleaded guilty to one charge, face up to life in prison.

“Beijing seems intent on imprisoning one of its most powerful critics for many years, possibly for the rest of his life,” said Maya Wang, associate Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The authorities should drop their bogus charges against Jimmy Lai and free him and his six co-defendants.”

Lai, 75, was the first person to be charged with “collusion with foreign forces” under the draconian National Security Law (NSL), which the Chinese government imposed on Hong Kong in June 2020. Lai faces three foreign collusion charges and a sedition charge, based on his tweets, interviews he hosted, and articles published by his newspaper, Apple Daily.


In addition to the national security charges, Lai was convicted in three cases of “unauthorized assembly” in April, May, and December 2021 for participating in peaceful protests and sentenced to 20 months in prison. He was also convicted on two “fraud” charges in October 2022 for alleged lease violations by his media company and sentenced to another 5 years and 9 months in prison. He has been serving his sentences since April 2021.

Lai’s trial has already been marred by serious violations of his fair trial rights:

  • Right to legal counsel: In October 2022, the Hong Kong High Court approved Lai’s application to be represented by British Senior Barrister Timothy Owen. The Department of Justice appealed the decision but lost in the Court of Appeal and the Final Court of Appeal. Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee then said he would ask the central Chinese government to intervene by “interpreting” Hong Kong’s de facto constitution, the Basic Law, to bar overseas lawyers from representing national security defendants. A top Hong Kong official further suggested that if Lai did not find a Hong Kong lawyer to represent him, he could be tried in China, where few procedural protections exist.
  • Prolonged pretrial detention: The NSL denies bail to suspects unless the judge is convinced they will not commit national security offenses. Lai has been detained since December 2020, when he was charged under the NSL. The law’s presumption against bail without regard to the seriousness or nature of the alleged offenses is inconsistent with the presumption in favor of bail and presumption of innocence in Hong Kong’s common law tradition and under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Both are incorporated into Hong Kong’s legal framework via the Basic Law and expressed in the Bill of Rights Ordinance.
  • Non-jury trial: In accordance with the NSL, the prosecution ordered a no-jury trial for Lai’s case, a departure from tradition for High Court criminal trials. The United Nations Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment No. 32 on the right to a fair trial, has stated that if “exceptional criminal procedures or specially constituted courts or tribunals [such as non-jury trials] apply in the determination of certain categories of cases, objective and reasonable grounds must be provided to justify the distinction.”
  • Handpicked judges: Three judges selected by the Hong Kong chief executive, who was selected by Beijing, will preside over the case.

Media reports say that the prosecution’s supposed evidence of “foreign collusion” against Lai consisted of his tweets seeking attention from foreign politicians, a meeting with the then-US secretary of state, and a talk show he hosted on Apple Daily’s digital platform on which he interviewed foreign politicians. Other ostensible evidence includes publishing an English version of Apple Daily, and his calls on foreign governments and politicians to support Hong Kong’s 2019 protests and to sanction Hong Kong officials for rights violations.

The prosecution alleged that these “communication[s] with external elements” between April 2019 and June 2021, some of which took place before the NSL came into effect, showed Lai was a “mastermind” in foreign collusion,” signaling a possible harsh sentence. None of the activities or speech cited espoused violence or other behavior that would constitute a recognizable crime under international law.

As evidence of “sedition,” the prosecution claimed that 160 articles published by the Apple Daily between 2019 and 2020, including op-eds written by pro-democracy politicians and activists, called on people to protest, “incited hatred against the police,” and “promoted the use of violent methods to resist the central Chinese government.” But it is unclear which articles the prosecution is using to substantiate these allegations.

In November 2022, Lai’s six co-defendants pleaded guilty to the charge of “conspiring” with Lai to “commit collusion with foreign forces.” The six are: Cheung Kim-hung, former chief executive of Next Digital, parent company of Apple Daily; Chan Pui-man, Apple Daily’s former associate publisher; Ryan Law Wai-kwong, former editor-in-chief; Lam Man-chung, former executive editor-in-chief; Fung Wai-kong, former executive editor-in-chief of the English news section; and Yeung Ching-kee, former editorial writer. The date for their hearing for the conspiring charge has not yet been set. Some of them will testify in Lai’s trial and their sentence will be handed down after the case concludes.

“The Chinese and Hong Kong governments’ maneuvers to bar foreign counsel from national security cases will further undermine the rule of law in the city, which has dropped precipitously since the National Security Law was imposed,” Wang said.

China’s top legislative body, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC), is expected to “interpret” the Basic Law during its next bimonthly session in late December, though the Standing Committee’s December agenda does not include such an item. If it does this, it will be the seventh time the Standing Committee has done so since Hong Kong’s transfer from British to Chinese control in 1997. Three of these seven decisions (in 2004, 2016, and 2020) eroded and eventually ended Hong Kong’s semi-democratic governance. The 2016 decision, when the Standing Committee disqualified two pro-independence politicians, and the upcoming decision involve Beijing’s direct interference in ongoing court cases in Hong Kong.

The Standing Committee’s decision will also further damage the independence of lawyers in Hong Kong and make it even harder for those in political trials to exercise their right to legal counsel. Some Hong Kong lawyers previously representing arrested protesters have left the city following the imposition of the NSL. Chinese and Hong Kong authorities’ high-profile harassment of the Hong Kong Bar Association’s former chairperson, Paul Harris, contributed to the intimidating environment. Barring defendants in national security cases from having foreign counsel will leave them with few or no Hong Kong-based lawyers willing to take their cases. Defendants would either have to hire lawyers compliant with Beijing’s demands, or risk being transferred to China and the Beijing-controlled legal system.

The significance of the Jimmy Lai case extends beyond Hong Kong, Human Rights Watch said. The Chinese government controls all Chinese language media in the mainland, along with the internet. Since 2020, the Chinese and Hong Kong governments have dismantled Hong Kong’s once-thriving independent press, which for decades had often been highly critical of the Chinese Communist Party. Hong Kong police raided and shuttered Apple Daily, along with another influential outlet, Stand News; at least seven other outlets shut down in fear of the crackdown. Now there are few alternative, independent Chinese language information sources for Chinese language speakers outside of Beijing’s control.

“Concerned governments should press Beijing to drop all charges against Lai,” Wang said. “The Chinese government’s assault on Hong Kong’s rule of law and free media present a global threat.”

Source link

Continue Reading


Surgeon General says 13 is 'too early' to join social media – CNN




US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy says he believes 13 is too young for children to be on social media platforms, because although sites allow children of that age to join, kids are still “developing their identity.”

Meta, Twitter, and a host of other social media giants currently allow 13-year-olds to join their platforms.

“I, personally, based on the data I’ve seen, believe that 13 is too early … It’s a time where it’s really important for us to be thoughtful about what’s going into how they think about their own self-worth and their relationships and the skewed and often distorted environment of social media often does a disservice to many of those children,” Murthy said on “CNN Newsroom.”


The number of teenagers on social media has sparked alarm among medical professionals, who point to a growing body of research about the harm such platforms can cause adolescents.

Murthy acknowledged the difficulties of keeping children off these platforms given their popularity, but suggested parents can find success by presenting a united front.

“If parents can band together and say you know, as a group, we’re not going to allow our kids to use social media until 16 or 17 or 18 or whatever age they choose, that’s a much more effective strategy in making sure your kids don’t get exposed to harm early,” he told CNN.

Teenagers especially at risk

teens social media STOCK

New research suggests habitually checking social media can alter the brain chemistry of adolescents.

According to a study published this month in JAMA Pediatrics, students who checked social media more regularly displayed greater neural sensitivity in certain parts of their brains, making their brains more sensitive to social consequences over time.

Psychiatrists like Dr. Adriana Stacey have pointed to this phenomenon for years. Stacey, who works primarily with teenagers and college students, previously told CNN using social media releases a “dopamine dump” in the brain.

“When we do things that are addictive like use cocaine or use smartphones, our brains release a lot of dopamine at once. It tells our brains to keep using that,” she said. “For teenagers in particular, this part of their brain is actually hyperactive compared to adults. They can’t get motivated to do anything else.”

Recent studies demonstrate other ways excessive screen time can impact brain development. In young children, for example, excessive screen time was significantly associated with poorer emerging literacy skills and ability to use expressive language.

Lawmakers are paying attention

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, who recently published an op-ed in the Bulwark about loneliness and mental health, echoed the surgeon general’s concerns about social media. “We have lost something as a society, as so much of our life has turned into screen-to-screen communication, it just doesn’t give you the same sense of value and the same sense of satisfaction as talking to somebody or seeing someone,” Murphy told CNN in an interview alongside Murthy.

For both Murphy and Murthy, the issue of social media addiction is personal. Both men are fathers – Murphy to teenagers and Murthy to young children. “It’s not coincidental that Dr. Murthy and I are probably talking more about this issue of loneliness more than others in public life,” Murphy told CNN. “I look at this through the prism of my 14-year-old and my 11-year-old.”

As a country, Murphy explained, the U.S. is not powerless in the face of Big Tech. Lawmakers could make different decisions about limiting young kids from social media and incentivizing companies to make algorithms less addictive.

The surgeon general similarly addressed addictive algorithms, explaining pitting adolescents against Big Tech is “just not a fair fight.” He told CNN, “You have some of the best designers and product developers in the world who have designed these products to make sure people are maximizing the amount of time they spend on these platforms. And if we tell a child, use the force of your willpower to control how much time you’re spending, you’re pitting a child against the world’s greatest product designers.”

Despite the hurdles facing parents and kids, Murphy struck a note of optimism about the future of social media.

“None of this is out of our control. When we had dangerous vehicles on the road, we passed laws to make those vehicles less dangerous,” he told CNN. “We should make decisions to make [social media] a healthier experience that would make kids feel better about themselves and less alone.”

Adblock test (Why?)


Source link

Continue Reading


Why U.S. media made the near-universal decision to show the Tyre Nichols video – The Globe and Mail



Activists knock on the locked door of the Memphis Police Department’s Ridgeway Station during a protest in honor of Tyre Nichols, on Jan. 29 in Memphis.Patrick Lantrip/The Associated Press

Before showing video of Memphis police brutally beating Tyre Nichols, MSNBC host Joy Reid acknowledged the risk that watching it could desensitize her audience. But it was necessary to show the footage, she contended, because it was rare to get such a clear look at police violence on camera.

“We’re going to show you this video because you pay for the police. The police work for the public,” Ms. Reid said. “It is violent, but it also is a depiction of the kind of police violence that normally happens outside your view.”

This introduction was one of the more thorough attempts by a U.S. media outlet to explain the near-universal decision to broadcast the video and post it online.


Unlike other police forces, which have often stonewalled efforts to get information on such incidents, the Memphis Police Department chose to make public more than an hour’s worth of footage, gleaned from officers’ body cameras and nearby CCTV. Releasing the video voluntarily gave police the ability to control its timing.

Analysis: Tyre Nichols’s death provokes deep introspection of America’s racial and cultural crises

Memphis police scrap unit involved in fatal beating of Tyre Nichols

The controlled release also gave media outlets more time to decide whether and how much of the video to disseminate. All of the United States’ major broadcasters and newspapers chose to show it in some fashion.

In stark contrast with other high-profile instances of police brutality, the Memphis police have moved swiftly to show accountability in the wake of Mr. Nichols’s death. In less than three weeks, the force fired five officers involved and charged them criminally. On the weekend, the unit to which they belonged was disbanded.

The footage shows officers dragging Mr. Nichols out of his car on the evening of Jan. 7, pepper-spraying him, tasing him, kicking him in the head, punching him in the face and hitting him with batons. He died in hospital three days later. Mr. Nichols was Black, as are the five officers accused of murdering him.

The Memphis police released the video footage on a Friday evening, when media outlets typically see their lowest readership and viewership figures.

Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland told The Commercial Appeal, the city’s main newspaper, that police wanted to ensure that, if there were mass protests in response, they would occur after people had left work for the day.

“That was a law-enforcement preference on trying to get people home from school and home from work, and do it after rush hour when people were safely at home,” he said.

As it was, protests on the weekend were far more modest than those in the wake of the 2020 murder of George Floyd – when Minneapolis police initially denied wrongdoing until bystander video showed otherwise – and remained mostly non-confrontational.

In photos: Protests over the death of Tyre Nichols erupt across the U.S. on Friday

In Mr. Nichols’s case, media outlets took differing approaches to disseminating the footage of his fatal beating.

CNN aired it live in its entirety, as it was released by the police. Later on, for its website, it edited the video down to its key moments, adding voiceover to explain the narrative of what was happening. The Washington Post synced the four videos up and posted them in full to provide as complete a picture as possible.

USA Today opted to post only the CCTV footage, which offered the broadest view of the scene but did not contain some of the most brutal close-ups of the beating. British newspaper The Guardian, which has a large presence in the U.S., opted for a heavily edited version that did not show the most violent moments.

All media included content advisories, though relatively few offered extensive explanations of the thinking behind sharing the video. One editor’s note, for the local NBC affiliate in Memphis, said it was necessary to put the footage out so viewers could judge for themselves what happened.

“Sharing this video will help our community understand and see the incidents from that evening,” the note read. “It’s the only way for you to see an unfiltered document of what transpired between Tyre and the five former Memphis police officers.”

Fox News, meanwhile, went in the opposite direction, with some of its personalities either downplaying the video’s significance or suggesting Mr. Nichols might have somehow been to blame.

“Does it bother you that you don’t have the cops’ perspective at all? I mean, it looks overwhelming, I get it. But don’t we need both sides?” Brian Kilmeade said. Jesse Watters speculated Mr. Nichols was “on something” during the arrest and opined that he “didn’t see any death blows” in the video.

Many Americans evinced discomfort with people so broadly viewing such footage. On social media, some chose to instead post video of a teenaged Mr. Nichols skateboarding in his hometown of Sacramento, calling for the 29-year-old, who worked as a FedEx driver and had a four-year-old son, to be remembered for the totality of his life.

“Before the Memphis Police Dept. releases the video of 5 MPD officers murdering #TyreNichols during a routine traffic stop, and that heinous video inevitably goes viral, I want to amplify THIS video of Tyre LIVING his best life,” writer Mai Perkins tweeted with the skateboard video.

Monnica T. Williams, an expert in mental-health disparities at the University of Ottawa, said people – particularly those who are marginalized or at a higher risk of falling victim to police violence – can become “very distressed or even traumatized” from watching these sorts of videos.

In Prof. Williams’s view, the videos should be made available to people who need to see them, such as those involved in the legal process, Mr. Nichols’s family and reporters covering the story, but they should not be broadcast in places people might see them without choosing to.

“One danger of putting videos like this out all the time is that people can sometimes become numb to the violence and just feel like it’s normal, and it shouldn’t be normal,” she said. “I don’t think they should be blasted all over social media and I don’t think people should be encouraged to watch them.”

Victoria Bridgland, a researcher at Flinders University in Adelaide, Australia, said limiting peoples’ exposure to traumatic materials “has to be balanced against the concern of spreading awareness about important social issues.” Her research has shown that there is little evidence trigger warnings are effective either at dissuading people from watching traumatic videos or preparing themselves emotionally for them.

“However, people often say they like trigger warnings because they like that they have a choice given to them (regardless of if they actually then choose to then avoid the distressing thing – which we know they likely do not),” she wrote in an e-mail. “People also say that they think trigger warnings communicate a culture of care.”

Mr. Nichols’s parents, for their part, used the police department’s management of the footage’s release to prepare the public ahead of time. Speaking with reporters before the video was made public, Mr. Nichols’s stepfather, Rodney Wells, called for demonstrations to remain non-violent.

“We want peaceful protests,” he said. “That’s what the family wants. That’s what the community wants.”

Adblock test (Why?)


Source link

Continue Reading


Russian teen faces years in jail over social media post criticizing war in Ukraine



Olesya Krivtsova sports an anti-Putin tattoo on one ankle and a bracelet that tracks her every move on the other.

The 19-year-old from Russia’s Arkhangelsk region must wear the device while she is under house arrest after she was charged over social media posts that authorities say discredit the Russian army and justify terrorism.

Russian officials added Krivtsova to the list of terrorists and extremists, on a par with ISIS, al Qaeda and the Taliban, for posting an Instagram story about the explosion on the Crimean bridge in October that also criticized Russia for invading Ukraine.

Krivtsova, a student at Northern (Arctic) Federal University in the northwestern city of Arkhangelsk, is also facing criminal charges for discrediting the Russian army for making an allegedly critical repost of the war in a student chat on the Russian social network VK.


Currently, Krivtsova is staying under house arrest in her mother’s apartment in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk region, banned from going online and using other forms of communication.

“Olesya’s case is not the first, nor is it the last,” Alexei Kichin, Krivtsova’s lawyer, told CNN.

Kichin said the teenager may face up to three years in prison for discrediting the Russian army and up to seven years in prison under the article of justification of terrorism. However, Krivtsova’s legal defense hopes for a softer punishment such as a fine.

Olesya wears a tracking bracelet on one ankle, and a tattoo on the other which reads "Big Brother is Watching You," with Russian President Vladimir Putin's face attached to the body of a spider.
Olesya Krivtsova, pictured at a court hearing, is now under house arrest in her mother's apartment.

Independent human rights monitor OVD-Info said at least 61 cases were initiated in Russia in 2022 on the charges of justification of terrorism on the internet, with 26 leading to sentencing so far.

Olesya’s mother, Natalya Krivtsova, says the government is trying to give a warning to the public, with her daughter being in effect “publicly flogged” for not keeping her views to herself.

High-ranking Russian officials are defecting. This man is aiding them


“We live in the Arkhangelsk region and this is a vast region but too remote from the center. There are no more protests in Arkhangelsk, so they are trying to strangle everything that is left at its early stage,” Natalya Krivtsova told CNN.

A local head of the Communist Party, Alexander Novikov, publicly mocked the teenager on state television, calling her a fool who should be sent to the front lines in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region so that she could “look into the eyes” of the military fighting as part of the Arkhangelsk battalion.

This is not Olesya Krivtsova’s first run-in with the authorities for publicly airing her views. Last May, she faced administrative charges for discrediting the Russian army by distributing anti-war posters.

Matters became more serious when she was accused of discrediting the Russian army on social media last October. According to Krivtsova’s lawyer, a repeat offense under the same article turns into a criminal case.

“She has a heightened sense of justice, which makes her life hard. The inability to remain silent is now a major sin in the Russian Federation,” her mother told CNN.

Olesya Krivtsova is seen in handcuffs.

According to Natalya Krivtsova, police burst into an apartment on December 26 where her daughter was living with her husband Ilya, forcing the young people to lie face down on the ground and allegedly threatening them with a sledgehammer, which the officers told her was a “hello” from the Wagner Group, a private military contractor headed by Yevgeny Prigozhin.

CNN has reached out to the state police in Arkhangelsk for comment.

“Olesya was very frightened because she saw the video in which a prisoner was killed with a sledgehammer,” her mother told CNN.

In the notorious video referred to by Natalya Krivtsova, mercenaries from the Wagner Group, which actively recruits prisoners, apparently executed a former convict, Yevgeny Nuzhin, with a sledgehammer after he attempted to flee his post. The video description said: “The traitor received the traditional, primordial Wagnerian punishment.”

“The state has some strange policies: prisoners go to war, and children go to prison,” she said.


Source link

Continue Reading