Asia
Media mogul Jimmy Lai sentenced to 20 years in Hong Kong prison
Critics of the decision argue that it is equivalent to a death sentence, whereas officials maintain that it upholds the principle of the rule of law.
A Hong Kong court has sentenced Jimmy Lai, a prominent pro-democracy figure and media mogul, to 20 years in prison for alleged collusion with foreign forces, in accordance with the city's national security law.
The verdict has sparked concerns from human rights organizations, which have likened the lengthy sentence to a life sentence for the 78-year-old Lai, given his advanced age and health issues, whereas Hong Kong's leadership has expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
This sentence marks the most severe punishment meted out under the national security law, which was introduced by China in response to the massive protests that took place in 2019, with the aim of maintaining stability in the city, according to the government.
As a British citizen and outspoken critic of China, Lai has been a high-profile target of the national security law, with his newspaper, Apple Daily, serving as a platform for his views and a symbol of resistance against the authorities.
In an interview with the BBC's Today programme, Sebastien Lai, Jimmy Lai's son, expressed his deep sadness and frustration over his father's imprisonment, revealing that he has repeatedly appealed to the UK government for assistance, but so far, his efforts have been unsuccessful.
Critics, including Sebastien Lai, have expressed disappointment over Prime Minister Keir Starmer's recent trip to China, viewing it as a missed chance to address key issues.
According to Sebastien, a particular statement marks the complete dismantling of Hong Kong's legal framework and the erosion of justice.
In contrast, Hong Kong authorities and China's foreign ministry argue that the sentencing of Lai underscores the city's commitment to upholding the law. The judges presiding over Lai's case denounced his actions as "serious and grave criminal conduct", categorizing the conspiracies he was involved in as among the most severe.
A significant police presence was noticeable around the court on Monday morning, prior to the sentencing.
Nevertheless, a large crowd of Lai's supporters had gathered, with some having waited for days in the hopes of attending the sentencing, demonstrating a strong show of support for him.
A supporter, who had been waiting in line since Thursday night, expressed a desire to personally greet Mr. Lai in court, stating that it would likely be their final encounter with him.
In the courtroom, Mr. Lai, dressed in a white jacket and black glasses, exchanged warm smiles with his family and supporters. Upon hearing his sentence, he remained composed, while some onlookers were overcome with emotion, and his wife, Teresa, struggled to hold back tears as she exited the court.
Mr. Lai has been incarcerated for over five years, having been previously convicted of fraud and unauthorized assemblies in a separate case.
On Monday, six former executives from Apple Daily and two activists received sentences under the national security law, with prison terms ranging from six years and three months to 10 years.
Lai has consistently maintained his innocence, asserting that his actions were motivated by a desire to uphold core Hong Kong principles, including the rule of law and freedom of expression.
A key aspect of the case is a meeting that took place between Lai and high-ranking US officials, including then-Vice President Mike Pence and then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, during the peak of the 2019 protests, where the situation in Hong Kong was discussed.
During his testimony in November, Lai stated that he had never leveraged his international connections to exert influence over foreign policy decisions regarding Hong Kong, claiming instead that his intention was simply to inform them about the situation.
Human rights organizations have criticized the sentence, characterizing it as excessively harsh and unjustified.
Jodie Ginsberg, of the Committee to Protect Journalists, condemned the ruling, stating, "The decision made today marks a devastating blow to press freedom in Hong Kong, effectively signaling its demise."
The international community is being urged to increase its efforts to secure Lai's release, with the argument being that this is essential for upholding press freedom globally.
According to Human Rights Watch's Asia director, Elaine Pearson, the outcome of Lai's case demonstrates the Chinese government's resolve to suppress independent journalism and stifle criticism of the Communist Party.
Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC, the head of Lai's international legal team, who was barred from representing him in court, is also calling on the global community to apply pressure on China.
Following the conclusion of the trial, Gallagher KC has appealed to world leaders to unite in demanding Lai's freedom, allowing him to reunite with his family in London, as she stated in an interview with the BBC.
Various countries, including the UK, Australia, the European Union, and Japan, have already voiced their concerns, while Volker Turk, the UN's human rights chief, has called for Lai's release due to his advanced age and health issues.
A spokesperson for China's foreign ministry deflected criticism by stating that the relevant judicial cases in Hong Kong are a domestic matter.
The spokesperson further emphasized that the central government is committed to backing the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government in its efforts to uphold national security and hold accountable those who pose a threat to it.
In a 2020 interview with the BBC, prior to his current situation, Lai expressed his deep connection to Hong Kong, saying that his success is a direct result of the opportunities he found there.
At the time, Lai, who was on bail, viewed his circumstances as a form of reparation, stating "If this is payback time, this is my redemption."
Lai, originally from Guangzhou, China, arrived in Hong Kong at the age of 12 as a stowaway on a fishing boat and went on to build a business empire worth millions of dollars, including the popular clothing brand Giordano, from humble beginnings in menial jobs.
Following the Chinese government's suppression of pro-democracy demonstrations in Beijing's Tiananmen Square in 1989, Lai shifted his focus to advocating for democratic rights.
Lai subsequently founded several pro-democracy publications, including Apple Daily and Next magazine, and consistently took part in public protests to further his cause.
Asia
Emergency call recording reveals boy’s heroic swim to save family
A 13-year-old boy, Austin Appelbee, took action to secure assistance for his mother and siblings when they were pulled out into the ocean.
An audio recording has been made public by authorities, capturing a distress call made by a 13-year-old Australian boy who swam for an extended period to seek assistance for his family after they were caught in a strong current at sea in early February.
During the call, the boy, identified as Austin Appelbee, informs emergency services that his brother, Beau, 12, sister, Grace, eight, and their mother remain in the water, awaiting rescue.
Austin expresses concern for his family's well-being, stating that he is unsure of their current condition, which is causing him significant distress.
The teenager also reports feeling severely exhausted, a result of his prolonged and physically demanding effort to reach shore and call for help.
Following the call, Austin lost consciousness and was hospitalized, where he later received news that his mother, brother, and sister had been rescued approximately 14 kilometers offshore and were in good health.
Asia
Australian opposition leader faces pressure after key staff member quits
The departure of a high-ranking colleague has created an opportunity for a potential challenge to Sussan Ley, who holds the distinction of being the first female leader of the Liberal party.
Sussan Ley, the first female leader of the Liberal Party, is facing renewed scrutiny following the departure of Angus Taylor, her shadow defence minister, from the party's leadership team.
Taylor's resignation is expected to pave the way for a potential challenge to Ley's leadership, with local media outlets suggesting he has been quietly working to unseat her for some time.
Ley's tenure has been marked by struggles, including a narrow victory over Taylor in a leadership contest last year, which was held in the aftermath of the party's worst-ever electoral performance.
The Liberal-National coalition, a partnership that dates back to the 1940s, has experienced significant instability under Ley's leadership, having split and reunited twice during her tenure.
On Wednesday, Taylor, a member of the party's conservative faction, announced his resignation from the leadership team, citing his commitment to continuing to serve the Liberal Party.
In a statement to reporters, Taylor expressed his disappointment with the party's inability to hold the current Labor government accountable, emphasizing the need to protect Australians' way of life and restore their standard of living.
Taylor stated that he does not believe Ley is capable of leading the party effectively, citing the need for a change in leadership.
It remains to be seen whether Taylor's allies within the shadow cabinet will follow his lead and resign from their positions.
Local media reports suggest that Taylor's supporters are planning to request a special party meeting to consider a spill motion, which would allow the party to reconsider its leadership.
If Taylor were to succeed in his bid for leadership, it would bring an end to the ongoing speculation surrounding Ley's tenure, which has been marred by uncertainty.
The coalition's most recent split, which occurred in January, was followed by a reunification just days ago, after a dispute over hate speech laws, which Ley had supported in the wake of the Bondi Beach attack in December.
At the time of the initial split, Nationals leader David Littleproud explicitly stated that his party could not continue to serve in a shadow cabinet under Ley's leadership.
Recent polling data has shown the One Nation party, which secured 6% of the national vote in the previous election, surpassing the Coalition to take second place behind Labor, while Ley's personal approval ratings remain low.
The coalition has yet to reach a consensus on the factors that contributed to its decisive election loss to Labor, which saw the Liberals suffer significant losses in major cities.
In the aftermath of the election, the coalition briefly split over disagreements on climate and energy policy, including its commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, a policy that the Liberals later abandoned under pressure from the Nationals and their own right-wing faction.
The Nationals, which have a strong presence in rural areas and tend to lean more conservative than the Liberals, have been pushed further to the right in response to the surge in support for the One Nation party, according to political analysts, who note that this shift may hinder the Liberals' ability to appeal to centrist voters in urban areas.
Asia
India sets 3-hour deadline for social media firms to remove illegal content
Concerns have been raised that the regulations may pose a difficulty for tech companies in terms of compliance and potentially lead to increased censorship.
In a significant update to its existing regulations, India has implemented new rules requiring social media companies to delete unlawful content within a three-hour window after being notified, a substantial reduction from the previous 36-hour timeframe.
These revised guidelines, set to come into effect on February 20, will apply to prominent platforms such as Meta, YouTube, and X, as well as content generated using artificial intelligence.
The government has not provided a specific reason for shortening the deadline for removing objectionable content.
Critics, however, are concerned that this move may be part of a broader effort to increase oversight of online content, potentially leading to censorship in a country with over a billion internet users, which is the world's largest democracy.
In the past, Indian authorities have utilized existing Information Technology rules to direct social media platforms to remove content deemed illegal under laws related to national security and public order, granting them broad authority over online content.
According to transparency reports, Indian authorities requested the removal of more than 28,000 URLs or web links in 2024, which were subsequently blocked.
The BBC has sought comment from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology regarding the latest amendments, while Meta has declined to comment; the BBC has also reached out to X and Google, the owner of YouTube, for their response.
The updated regulations also introduce new guidelines for AI-generated content, marking a significant development in the country's approach to regulating online material.
For the first time, Indian law defines AI-generated content, including audio and video that has been created or altered to appear realistic, such as deepfakes, while excluding ordinary editing, accessibility features, and genuine educational or design work.
Platforms that allow users to create or share AI-generated content must clearly label it, and where possible, add permanent markers to facilitate tracing its origin.
Once labels are added to AI-generated content, companies will not be permitted to remove them; furthermore, they must utilize automated tools to detect and prevent the dissemination of illegal AI content, including deceptive or non-consensual material.
Technology experts and digital rights groups have expressed concerns regarding the feasibility and implications of the new regulations.
The Internet Freedom Foundation has stated that the shortened timeline will effectively transform platforms into "rapid fire censors," highlighting the potential risks associated with the updated rules.
The group has argued that the extremely short deadlines will eliminate the possibility of meaningful human review, forcing platforms to rely on automated removals, which may lead to over-removal of content.
Anushka Jain, a research associate at the Digital Futures Lab, has welcomed the requirement for labeling AI-generated content, suggesting that it could enhance transparency; however, she has also cautioned that the three-hour deadline may push companies towards complete automation.
Jain has noted that companies are already struggling to comply with the 36-hour deadline due to the need for human oversight, and that a fully automated process may result in the censorship of legitimate content.
Prasanto K Roy, a Delhi-based technology analyst, has described the new regulations as "perhaps the most extreme takedown regime in any democracy," highlighting the challenges associated with compliance.
Roy has stated that meeting the new requirements will be "nearly impossible" without extensive automation and minimal human oversight, as the tight deadline leaves little room for assessing the legitimacy of removal requests.
Regarding the labeling of AI-generated content, Roy has acknowledged the positive intention behind the regulation but has also noted that reliable and tamper-proof labeling technologies are still in development.
The BBC has requested a response from the Indian government regarding the concerns raised by technology experts and digital rights groups.
-
News8 hours agoAustralian Politics Faces Questions Over Gender Equality Amid Sussan Ley’s Appointment
-
News6 hours agoFarage Says Reform to Replace Traditional Tory Party
-
News6 hours agoWrexham Pair Seek Win Against Former Team Ipswich
-
News11 hours agoLiberal Party Removes Australia’s First Female Leader
-
News9 hours agoUK Braces for Cold Snap with Snow and Ice Alerts Expected
-
News6 hours agoHusband’s alleged £600k theft for sex and antiques blamed on drug side effects
-
News2 days agoSunbed ads spreading harmful misinformation to young people
-
Business11 hours agoBBC Reporter Exposed to Cyber Attack Due to Vulnerabilities in AI Coding Tool