Jimmy Lai Conviction

Baroness Kennedy of Shaws Excerpts

Wednesday 17th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, I first draw attention to my roles as a vice-chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Hong Kong, as a patron of Hong Kong Watch and as chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, which published a report on transnational repression earlier this year and specifically called for China to be included in the advanced higher tier of the foreign influence registration scheme, referred to by the noble Earl, Lord Courtown. The noble Lord, Lord Oates, referred to Carmen Lau. One of the witnesses we had before that committee was Chloe Cheung, who came to this country as a young girl of 14 years of age, and at 19 years of age had a bounty of 1 million Hong Kong dollars placed on her head along with Carmen Lau and other British residents. This is a very serious situation, and I hope the Minister will respond to the point about FIRS when she comes to reply.

Jimmy Lai is a British citizen, and I know him and his family. I have immense admiration for his courage, honesty and integrity. I fear that unless he is released, this outrageous conviction will prove to be a death sentence. Jimmy Lai’s only crime has been to speak the truth, to believe in democracy, to champion freedom and to defend the British-China treaty, which guaranteed “one country, two systems” and has been broken again and again. What more are we doing to secure unhindered access to Jimmy Lai’s medics, pastor, consular officials and loved ones? Does the Minister agree that this sham trial has nothing to do with justice and resembles Lewis Carroll’s parody of nonsensical justice based on verdict first, trial later, with the outcome always a foregone conclusion?

Since Lenin introduced show trials in 1922, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung and today’s CCP leaders have perfected a technique of gross judicial theatre to spread terror and to inculcate fear. Does the Minister agree that the remaining British and Australian judges who lend respectability to these star chambers should follow Lord Sumption and remove themselves forthwith? In Hong Kong, rule of law has been replaced by rule by law. What are we doing to raise the cases of hundreds of pro-democracy supporters, such as Joshua Wong and Andy Li, who continue to languish in CCP prisons, many on national security charges that range from the draconian to the ludicrous? Will the Prime Minister please think again about going to China until Jimmy Lai has been released from these wretched prison conditions and allowed to leave and be reunited with his family?

[Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws (Lab)]

My Lords—

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

It does have a feeling of a Second Reading debate, but that is because the noble Lord is so knowledgeable about these issues and the case of his friend Jimmy Lai in particular.

I am very grateful to the noble Lord for putting his position in the way that he did. I agree with much of what he said, particularly about Jimmy Lai personally. I will try to respond to the questions in as straightforward a way as I possibly can, because I know that is what he would want. I do not have anything to tell him about FIRS designations. We have not made decisions on that yet, but as soon as that decision is made, I am sure it will be communicated in the usual way.

The noble Lord is absolutely right, and I could not agree with him more, about the nature of this trial, if we can call it that. It was politically motivated. There is no circumstance in which Jimmy Lai should be detained. He should have access to consulate officials, his family, medical treatment and people who can help him with his faith, but he should not need those things because he should not be imprisoned in the first place.

On the issue of judges, we all have our professional regulations and codes that we need to stick to in this place and in any professional walk of life, but we also have our own consciences that guide the decisions we make. It is good that in this country our judiciary is independent and makes its own decisions and choices about what it does. I noted the decision made by Lord Sumption and his reasons for making it, and I think people can make their own conclusions on that.

On the issue of prime ministerial travel to China, I do not know what the Prime Minister’s plans are regarding going to China. This is not a comment in relation to the specific question about the Prime Minister’s travel, but a more general observation: I think it would be a mistake to cut off all ties with China at this point, because there was no leader-level interaction for the previous six years under the previous Government, and it did not get us very far. We may be more successful if we have that degree of engagement and, when we have that engagement, we use it well to make these cases. As the noble Lord said, Jimmy Lai’s case is surely one of the most abhorrent, but there are others too. He is right to remind us of that.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The noble and learned Lord is right to suggest that we speak to our allies and partners about this and try to elicit support from others in securing his release. We are doing that and will continue to do that, including with the United States.

He asks why we do not just disregard the quasi-judicial process, override it and make a politically driven decision in relation to the application for the former Royal Mint. Quite simply, it is because we are better than that, and we do not do that. Having an embassy is not a reward for like-minded partners in this country. That is not how we make these choices. A decision will be made in the right way, taking into account all the issues that are relevant to that decision by MHCLG.

[Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws (Lab)]

My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Alton, I have been involved with the arrest and subsequent trial of Jimmy Lai. I too am a patron of Hong Kong Watch. I am also on the Joint Committee on Human Rights, and members of my chambers have been acting for Jimmy Lai in his case internationally.

I want to raise a number of things that have not yet been mentioned. The first is the extent to which Jimmy Lai is being used as an example. The prosecution of Jimmy Lai is to silence those who are advocating for real democracy. That is what it is really about. The chilling effect is very real when you speak to lawyers there and interact with people who have been major pro-democracy advocates. The difficulty for people such as the noble Lord, Lord Alton, and me, having been sanctioned by the Chinese because of our criticism, is that we often cannot be in touch with people in Hong Kong with whom we have had long-term relationships. To do so would endanger them. If you look at the judgment, I appear as a collaborator in Jimmy Lai’s crimes. Actually, although I am a very close friend of his son and his daughter-in-law, I have never met Jimmy Lai. Yet I am supposed to be one of the people with whom he was conspiring to undermine national security.

He is a man of 78. He has been in custody for six years in solitary confinement. He is suffering serious ill health and Sebastien Lai, his son, only two days ago was here in this House and described in some detail the state of his health and how concerned the family is. Could our Prime Minister not be asking for clemency on that basis? The children of Jimmy Lai are based in this country. They were educated in this country. Jimmy Lai has a British passport. He has never had any other passport. He is a British citizen, a British subject, and has always maintained that of himself. The period between now and the visit to China by the Prime Minister is an opportunity to negotiate for clemency and for him to be returned to Britain, where he could be with his children and live out the last part of his life.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

We are clear that Jimmy Lai is British. He should be released because there was no need for him to be detained in the first place. This whole situation has been politically driven from the very beginning, not least for the reasons that my noble friend describes about wanting to make an example and to induce this chilling effect that has occurred. Our Prime Minister will do whatever he needs to do and will make the argument in the way that he thinks is most impactful, as I know my noble friend would expect, to argue for and demand the immediate release of Jimmy Lai.