Arrest of Cardinal Zen was not result of religion issues
Tony Kwok says SAR government has responsibility to act on suspicion of National Security Law offenses
The five trustees of the “612 Humanitarian Relief Fund”, which supported the 2019 violent social unrest in Hong Kong through various means, including providing legal aid to the arrested protestors and rioters, were all arrested recently, triggered by one of them being caught at Hong Kong International Airport while attempting to leave the city.
The arrest of one of the trustees, retired Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, not unexpectedly, immediately drew condemnation from many quarters of the Western world, all based on unsubstantiated allegations, including suppression of democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, and even persecution, you name it!
One of the most intriguing responses came from Mark Simon, the former group director of Next Media Group and personal assistant to Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, owner of Next Media Group, who published an opinion article in the Washington Post only a day after Zen’s arrest, titled: Why Is China Afraid of a 90-Year-Old Catholic Bishop? Obviously, his intention was to come to Zen’s rescue, but ironically, his article turned out to provide damning evidence of Zen’s criminality!
Firstly, one must appreciate that most of the top executives of Next Media Group have been arrested for national security offenses and are now under prosecution proceedings. Simon apparently escaped arrest in the nick of time and is probably now wanted by police. So, whatever a suspected criminal accomplice says about his fellow accomplices should be taken in that context. Furthermore, it is a well-known secret that Simon was a former US military intelligence officer, and his role is most questionable as to why a Chinese publisher in Hong Kong would need a US former intelligence officer as his personal assistant for 21 years! His background and prompt response simply adds to the suspicion of Zen’s collusion with foreign forces!
In his article, Simon disclosed that he had accompanied Zen in his travels to the United States on five separate occasions, including one in 2007, when he arranged for Zen to meet with then-US president George W Bush. Why would a Hong Kong cardinal want to travel to the US five times? Who paid for these trips, and was he traveling in luxurious business or first class and residing in five-star hotels? Surely with a minimum living allowance from the church, he could hardly afford so many overseas travels. What was the purpose of these five trips, and what was discussed secretly between Zen and president Bush? All these indeed fit in with the police investigation on his suspected collusion with foreign forces!
Simon also revealed that Zen was pressed twice by Vatican representatives to cancel the meeting with Bush, as it would create “a bad impression” on the Vatican and adversely affect the Vatican’s attempts to cultivate a healthy relationship with China. Simon related that Zen “refused both times, chuckling when he told me about it”! Such a contemptuous attitude toward the Vatican, to which he was supposed to have taken a solemn vow of obedience when he took up the priesthood, is mind-boggling! No wonder the Vatican’s response to his arrest has been so lukewarm!
What Simon did not reveal in his article is that he was the middleman in transferring a total sum of no less than HK$26 million ($3.3 million) from Jimmy Lai to Zen. Why would a bishop want such a large sum of money? The Catholic Church of Hong Kong said it has no knowledge of this money nor any of it having gone through the accounts of the church. How was the money disposed of, then? Did it go to the private pockets or personal living expenditures of Zen? If so, did he obtain permission from the church to accept such advantage, which may be contrary to the Prevention of Bribery law in Hong Kong? Most importantly, was the money used for subversive purposes in Hong Kong and on the Chinese mainland? Undoubtedly this is the main line of the current police investigation on Zen and the stated reason for his arrest, and quite justified under international standards of national security enforcement.
The third area of police investigation is likely to be on the money trail of the fund. The fund claimed that it had received donations totaling HK$236 million, which was almost completely spent. Who were the donors? Already there is evidence of donations from US-based organizations as well as from Jimmy Lai’s Next Media Group! Where and what was the money spent on? According to reliable sources, the fund had sponsored some local university student unions to travel to Geneva and London with a view to persuade foreign governments to impose sanctions on the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, clearly a national security offense. Also, some lawyers who claimed that they were providing pro bono services to the rioters were registered in the accounts as being paid for their services by the fund. That is deception and a breach of the lawyers’ code of conduct.
What is most suspicious is that the fund was never formally registered as a company or organization with the government and did not have a bank account of its own. It used the bank account of another anti-China organization, which is closely connected with the National Democratic Institute, an organization affiliated with the US Central Intelligence Agency, for accepting donations and effecting payments. Such questionable behavior is deemed unacceptable and criminal in most countries. This is even more inexcusable as one of the trustees of the fund, Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, is a seasoned barrister. When the national security police issued a legal order demanding it hand over operational details, including information about its donors and beneficiaries, the trustees immediately disbanded the organization! This inevitably brought significant suspicions from the authorities, hence their arrests on reasonable suspicion are absolutely justifiable.
I believe it was not the intention of police to mount the arrests at this stage, as from experience, it would take years to follow through all the money trails of the fund involving HK$236 million in donations and the HK$26 million Zen had received. Police would probably have preferred to complete the full financial investigation before deciding to take the arrest action. Ironically, the arrest was triggered by one of the trustees caught trying to depart Hong Kong, and he had to be intercepted.
As things go, I believe Zen will remain on police bail for a long period pending the outcome of the protracted financial investigation, and it is to be expected that some foreign powers will use it as an excuse to condemn the SAR government. It is therefore important to put this in proper perspective, by explaining openly that it is only fair for police to complete their investigations thoroughly and weighing the evidence properly before the Department of Justice can decide whether to charge Zen. There is every likelihood that he will be charged, and if so, his full criminality and his subversive activities will be fully exposed in the court proceedings, and his involvement with the foreign forces will put the latter to shame. But most importantly, it will confirm that his arrest has absolutely nothing to do with any allegations of suppression of democracy, human rights, freedom of speech or religion. The whole seedy affair involves nothing but national security offenses, and it is beholden on the government to take the necessary enforcement action. It also serves to demonstrate that in Hong Kong, no one is above the law, not even prominent religious figures with powerful foreign backing!
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.