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.
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.
They didn’t need justifications, at least not specific ones. There’s a very distinct implication here that China vaguely found this man’s pro-democracy speech and assembly dangerous to the establishment and that was enough
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.
deleted by creator
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.
deleted by creator
They didn’t need justifications, at least not specific ones. There’s a very distinct implication here that China vaguely found this man’s pro-democracy speech and assembly dangerous to the establishment and that was enough