Crossroads Podcast: Jimmy Lai’s Faith Matters More Than the Headlines Admit

Hong Kong was tense and festive when I arrived for a small 1997 conference about religion coverage in global media. The reason for the odd atmosphere was obvious: In a few days, on July 1, Great Britain would yield control of that great city to the People’s Republic of China.

I interviewed several Christians active in human-rights work about this process (“On Religion” columns found here and here) and each mentioned clashes between specific clauses in the Special Administrative Region’s Basic Law that would define Hong Kong life immediately after the handover. Their concerns are directly related to the news reports that provided the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” Podcast.

The good news, as described in my second column, was Article 32:

“Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of religious belief and freedom to preach and to conduct and participate in religious activities in public.” Article 141 uses similar language, but adds that the government pledges not to interfere in religious groups’ internal affairs, except when such activities “contravene the laws of the Region.” At the moment, these laws are controlled by politicians and tycoons appointed by Beijing. Also, China has ruled that the standing committee of the National People’s Congress not Hong Kong’s court of final appeals — will ultimately decide disputes about the Basic Law.

The language that cause the most concern was in Article 23:

It states that Hong Kong’s new leadership “shall enact laws ... to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition (or) subversion against the Central People’s Government, ... to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies.”

Would that include the Vatican playing a major role in Catholic life in Hong Kong, as in selecting the church’s leaders? Could Hong Kong Baptist Theological Seminary maintain ties with Baptist conventions overseas and other evangelical networks? Could faith leaders speak out on China’s actions in Tibet and other flashpoints on issues of religious freedom?

Finally, what if religious leaders — citing centuries of doctrine — opposed new laws created by the government of China? Would this be considered “treason,” “secession” or “sedition”?

I asked: Were there specific things human-rights activists around the world should watch carefully as Hong Kong moved into the future? Over and over I heard: Watch what happens to Cardinal Joseph Zen and the billionaire media magnate Jimmy Lai, founder of the city’s freewheeling Apple Daily newspaper. Many expected the latter to flee, since he held a British passport.

This leads us to this pivotal double-decker New York Times headline: 

To China, He Was an Arch Villain. To His Supporters, He Was Their Hope.

Jimmy Lai, the Hong Kong publisher and democracy campaigner, was convicted of national security charges in a city where even minor dissent is now whispered.

Read this part of that story carefully:

The judges painted Mr. Lai as a wealthy man who used his money and influence to lobby foreign countries, and, in particular, the United States. These actions, they said, were akin to an American national working with Russia to bring down the U.S. government under the banner of helping the state of California.

From inside a glass box in the courtroom, Mr. Lai sat mostly still as he listened.

The self-proclaimed “troublemaker” — whose Apple Daily once gave blanket coverage to the pro-democracy demonstrations — now faces up to life in prison. The court has set four days aside for a pre-sentencing hearing starting on Jan. 12 and the punishment would be announced “as soon as possible.” …

After hearing the verdict, Mr. Lai stood up and waved to his wife, Teresa, who was sitting with one of his sons, Lai Shun Yan, and Cardinal Joseph Zen, the former Roman Catholic bishop of Hong Kong and an outspoken supporter of democracy.

A strategic fact: It was Cardinal Zen who baptized Lai as a Catholic in, note the timing, 1997. That would have been a detail worth a few extra words from the Times. The 93-year-old Zen has also been found guilty of opposing changes in Hong Kong, but not imprisoned at this point.

Still, it was important that the Times mentioned Cardinal Zen.

When recording this podcast, host Todd Wilken and I discussed the role that Lai’s conversion played in the tumultuous years in which the billionaire sold his successful clothing retail chain, Giordano, and founded Apple Daily. Lai made it clear that the tabloid would focus coverage on human-rights issues and causes in Hong Kong, no matter what. He even marched in public demonstrations.

Lai is, of course, an outspoken advocate of freedom of the press and free speech, but has been just as outspoken on issues of religious liberty. In the past, he has poured millions of his own dollars into building and rebuilding Catholic sanctuaries in China.

Why avoid the role that his faith plays in this drama? It is, for example, important that the Chinese government has denied him access to Holy Communion and other sacraments. The 78-year-old Lai has been in solitary confinement for five years (authorities insist this was his choice).

I searched some mainstream coverage of the verdict — The Associated Press, the BBC and CNN — for references to Lai’s Catholic faith and found nothing. To its credit, the National Public Radio report did note:

Family members have said Lai has been sustained by his Catholic faith and by the study of scripture after having spent more than 1,800 days in solitary confinement, much of it at his own request, according to the Hong Kong government.

But they also say Lai’s health has declined substantially during the last five years in prison through Hong Kong’s sweltering summers and damp winters, and that he is suffering from advanced diabetes and heart palpitations.

The URL linked to the term “sustained” pointed readers to a Catholic Times report that addressed the faith elements of this drama.

Readers seeking additional information can, of course, turn to Catholic media sources for coverage of his life and the trial. For example, see this National Catholic Registercommentary by veteran human-rights activist Nina Shea: “Lai, a Hero for Fundamental Freedoms.”

I will end with this statement from Lord Patten of Barnes, the last British governor of Hong Kong. It was published by the activist group Hong Kong Watch: 

Like everyone who believes in the values of free societies under the Rule of Law, I am horrified but not surprised by the verdict on Jimmy Lai. We should be absolutely clear that this judgement confirms three things.

First, the Chinese Communist Party clearly broke its word about the Joint Declaration, a Treaty signed between Britain and China, which was supposed to guarantee Hong Kong’s freedom and rule of law until 2047. The Jimmy Lai verdict, handed down by politically appointed judges with no jury, is as strong evidence as one could have about China’s contempt for the agreement that it signed, and for its contempt for freedom also.

Second, we need to be clear about why China has targeted Jimmy Lai, a British citizen who has been denied consular access to the UK Foreign Office during his imprisonment. He has also been denied, as a practising Catholic, the ability to attend Mass in prison and receive Holy Communion in his cell.

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) hates Jimmy Lai because he is an example of the history of so many of Hong Kong’s population. He stowed away to escape communist rule in mainland China and enjoyed economic and political freedom in what was then a British colony. He became a passionate advocate for the freedoms which made Hong Kong such a successful example of the partnership between economic and political freedom.

What the Communists really hated about him was that, even when he could have left Hong Kong in 1997 for Britain, as a citizen here, or for other countries, he chose to stay behind alongside the people of Hong Kong whose human rights he had so long defended and written about. Beijing, and the puppet government in Hong Kong, hates in particular those who have bravely stood up to it.

Having spent almost five years in solitary confinement Jimmy will clearly have to continue to endure further imprisonment. I hope that all in the rest of the world who believe in freedom will call frequently and loudly for his release from captivity.

The Catholic Church should also raise in particular the refusal to allow him in prison to practice as a Catholic.

Finally, I saw Jimmy Lai’s son Sebastian again recently and had a message from Jimmy’s wife. I assured them that all who believe in human rights and decency would continue to campaign for his release. Jimmy is one of the best examples of the dissidents who suffer from tyrannical regimes. Anyone who thinks that the Chinese Communist Party can be trusted or that it is capable of reforming itself should remember Jimmy Lai’s case.

It is of course revealing that one thing that the Chinese Communist Party is terrified of is the freedoms that made Hong Kong so special, and which will eventually lead to change in China itself. I hope this will be accomplished without turbulence.

I trust this Christmas that as many people as possible will speak out for Jimmy and that all Christians will pray for him at this special moment.

The Rt Hon Lord Patten of Barnes KG CH

Governor of Hong Kong 1992-1997

Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it along to others.