After ‘Textbook Show Trial,’ Jimmy Lai’s Son Fears His Father Will Spend Rest of His Life in Prison

The son of the jailed Hong Kong newspaper editor Jimmy Lai fears his 77-year-old father will spend the rest of his life in prison as Beijing pursues its crackdown on freedom of speech for citizens of the former British colony, which reverted to Chinese rule in 1997.“It’s a textbook show trial,” Sebastien Lai, now living at London, told the Sun. “He’s most likely to be found guilty, which carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.” Considering his father’s age, he added, “even a sentence of a few years will have the same effect.”Sebastien Lai talked to the Sun as the trial of Jimmy Lai, founder and publisher of a popular Hong Kong newspaper acclaimed for its pungent criticism of Communist rule, reaches its final stages in what’s widely seen as a crucial test of Beijing’s crackdown on criticism of its policies. Sebastien Lai said the trial of his father, in jail in Hong Kong for nearly five years, “was delayed for a day last week” while his father suffered “heart palpitations” but did not indicate his life was in danger. As long as Mr. Lai is physically capable of appearing in court, the three-judge panel will likely be ready to announce its verdict in the near future.A propaganda barrage from Beijing indicates the judges know what verdict to announce: guilty as charged. The Chinese state newspaper, Global Times, left no doubt of a verdict when it said Hong Kong authorities had “strongly disapproved and rejected the slanderous remarks made by external forces, including anti-China media organizations.” The Hong Kong government accused its critics of attempting “to interfere with the court” while “perverting the course of justice.”It’s still possible that the court, after finding Mr. Lai guilty, could go easy on sentencing him in view of his age and medical condition — and also the fact that his newspaper, Apple Daily, was forced to close soon after he and several of the paper’s editors were arrested. A display of judicial mercy, however, is not expected as President Xi Jinping asserts his authority over Hong Kong’s often restive 7.5 million people, many of whom claim that Beijing, by stifling dissent, is violating the agreement made with Britain when China took over the former colony 28 years ago.“The implications are two-fold: For Hong Kong’s legal system and for the city’s freedoms,” Sebastien Lai told the Sun. “What they are doing to my father is lawfare. They have weaponized and therefore destroyed their legal system. It destroys the trust that Hong Kong’s legal system had taken so many years to build up.” “The freedoms that my father campaigned for and defended,” Sebastien Lai added, “are freedoms that underpin all democratic countries.” Mr. Lai said that his father had “campaigned for those freedoms using peaceful protest and journalism at huge personal cost.” If he’s forced to stay in prison for the rest of his days, the authorities “are telling the world that all those who have the courage and selflessness to stand up for the freedom of others are also deserving of death,” said Mr. Lai. “I don’t believe that is the message they want to send.”_______________Correction: Sebastien Lai currently lives at London. An earlier version misstated his place of residence.

After ‘Textbook Show Trial,’ Jimmy Lai’s Son Fears His Father Will Spend Rest of His Life in Prison

More from the New York Sun

Another Pirro Loss: DOJ Drops Case Against Olympic Canoeist, Admitting Reflecting Pool Renovation Was ‘Hasty and Botched’

Grain Ships Burning in Black Sea May Foreshadow Hunger in Global South

Moroccans Flooding Spain’s Ceuta Territory Expose Madrid’s Duplicity on Decolonization, Borders, and Migration

Louisiana Officials Bypass Their Own Laws in Bid for Federal Nuclear Dump

Democrats Fume as Oil Companies’ Profits Surge Amid the War in Iran

A Charm Campaign in the Trenches: How Kyiv Talked Its Way Into MAGA’s Good Graces

Child ID Scare Brings New Attention to Privacy Fears Over Smart Glasses

Planned Expiry of Medicare Drug Subsidy Draws Ire of Democrats and Advocates for Seniors