By deciding to give a “freedom of speech award” to Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, who is serving a 20-year jail term for violating national security laws, Deutsche Welle downgraded itself to an ideological propaganda tool.

In glorifying Lai, DW Director General Barbara Massing claimed: "Jimmy Lai has stood unwaveringly for press freedom … we honor his indispensable dedication to democratic values."

What a slap in the face of fact. Apple Daily, Lai’s now-defunct media flagship, initiated a trend of grabbing readership by selling pornography and sensationalism in Hong Kong’s media sector when it started as a tabloid. It designated a couple of permanent pages for pictures of scantily-clad women and prostitution guides, aside from excelling in sensationalist reporting on social issues, mostly family or domestic tragedies. This toxic approach had poisoned Hong Kong’s media ecosystem for decades before Apple Daily shifted its focus to China-bashing politics when Lai believed that it was a more profitable business.      

Are these the “democratic values” that DW cited for its fat-witted ideological propaganda ploy with Lai as a tool?

The notion that Lai “has stood unwaveringly for press freedom” exposes not merely deliberate ignorance about Lai’s case but a willful attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of its readers and the international community.

Lai was convicted after the court was convinced of his guilt beyond any doubt; the trial had gone through a rigorous legal process, with open hearings over 150 days, more than 2,000 pieces of evidence examined, and witnesses testifying--in full view of foreign diplomatic officials, journalists, and members of the general public who attended the hearings. Lai and his team of prominent senior counsels were given ample opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and present their arguments.

DW and those behind the “freedom of speech award” stunt are naive to believe that the “freedom of speech” notion sells well. After all of the evidence has been laid bare in the open court and before their own eyes, members of the international community are already fully aware of the true nature of Lai’s case.  

Lai’s conviction has nothing to do with “freedom of speech”. He was proved – beyond any doubt – guilty of sedition and collusion with foreign forces with a clear and consistent political objective of subverting the constitutional order governing the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region – acts that threaten China’s national security and sovereignty over the region.

Specifically, Lai commanded the publication of dozens of seditious articles to incite public hatred toward the central and HKSAR governments, and instigate political confrontation, alongside actively lobbying for United States sanctions. None of these falls into the scope of ordinary political criticism or journalistic commentary. They were sustained, deliberate and organized efforts to incite subversion and solicit foreign sanctions and hostile measures against China and its HKSAR.

Those behind DW’s “freedom of speech award” maneuver and Reporters Without Borders’ brazen lionizing of Lai are disingenuous at best, and morally corrupt at worst, when they blithely pretend to be unaware of the clear boundary between press freedom/freedom of expression and active collusion with external forces and soliciting foreign sanctions or hostile actions against one's own polity. Such acts have never been treated as part of protected freedom of expression--whether in history or the modern international community. Rather, they have consistently been dealt with harshly as one of the gravest public crimes. Lai's conviction is not an anomaly but a normal and appropriate application of this centuries-old legal boundary.

Reporters Without Borders exposed its ideological bigotry in glorifying Lai as an “independent publisher” in its latest bogus “Freedom Index” report, when in fact Lai had engaged in a relentless political crusade to topple China’s political institution, using the HKSAR as its operating base and exploiting the region’s high degree of autonomy to the fullest.

Lai himself has never pretended to be an “independent publisher”. He had no qualms about making public his anti-China political mission. In August 2019, when the “black-clad riots” were at their height, Lai openly told CNN in an interview: “We in Hong Kong are fighting for the shared values of the US against China. We are fighting their war in the enemy camp.”

Reporters Without Borders’ enthusiasm for vilifying China and its HKSAR with its phony “Freedom Index” should be deciphered in the context that the organization is largely funded by the European Union, the United States Department of State, and other governments of US allies. As to the question of whether those behind DW’s “freedom of speech award” scheme are also in Washington’s pocket, all fair-minded people have the answer.

After all, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), dubbed as the “second CIA”, and its peers keep running overseas with ample funds from the US government. The US House of Representatives’ Appropriations Committee has just approved the Fiscal Year 2027 National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, which, under the heading Democracy Fund, authorizes the allocation of no less than $5 million “for democracy and internet freedom programs for Hong Kong, including legal and other support for democracy activists”.

Now we have an idea where such US government appropriations, mostly channeled through NED and the likes, find their destinations.

The author is a current affairs commentator.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.