Media loses the plot on a key arrest in China

By Tu Jing-wei 涂京威





Simon Cheng (鄭文傑), a Hong Konger employed by the British consulate in Hong Kong was seized by Chinese security officials in August while attending a business conference in Shenzhen, an arrest that sent shock waves around the world.

There are four significant aspects to this case: First, as a consulate employee, Cheng was under the jurisdiction of the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office; second, he had brought money with him, apparently for Chinese-born relatives living in Shenzhen; third, China’s security extracted a confession from him through torture; fourth, he was arrested for allegedly soliciting prostitutes.

Ever since state broadcaster China Central Television aired a report alleging Cheng had visited prostitutes in Shenzhen — and the BBC’s interview with him, during which he accused Chinese security officials of torturing him — the debate surrounding the case seems to have lost sight of two key issues: that Cheng was carrying out work on behalf of the British government and that he was carrying a sum of money on his person.

An online commenter has already exposed the prostitute allegation as a lie — closed-circut video footage released by China’s police indicates that Cheng did not visit any prostitutes, so if the police knew this, why arrest him for soliciting a prostitute?

This exposes the true significance of China’s news operations: To use media misinformation to stir up moral outrage, sow confusion and conceal important information.

The real reason he was arrested was because security officials intended to prosecute him on national security charges.

China’s state security apparatus are working on the supposition that the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong are being orchestrated by foreign powers.

To prove this, Beijing needed evidence and a Hong Konger working for the UK, who failed to declare all the money he brought into China, was the perfect target.

From Beijing’s perspective, they had identified a foreign connection and movement of funds. This provided sufficient grounds to suspect a foreign power was engaged in activities designed to overthrow the state and warranted the arrest of Cheng on charges of foreign espionage.

Once the security services felt they had collected enough evidence, they intercepted and arrested him as he was returning to Hong Kong.

Cheng’s case demonstrates that any foreign national arrested on national security grounds by Chinese security officials could be tortured.

However, following Cheng’s arrest, interrogation and torture, there was insufficient evidence to back up the national security charges, so state security officials could not prosecute a Hong Konger on charges of foreign espionage.

This meant that they had to extricate themselves from a mess, and called in the police to lend a hand, who duly obliged, telling the media that Cheng was being held in “administrative custody.”

Even though the police knew that he had not visited prostitutes, they said so anyway, not only to justify his arrest, but to provoke a moral backlash. The intention was to smear Cheng, question his testimony and hijack public debate around the case.

It appears that Beijing is trying to cover up the arrest of an employee of the UK government in what was clearly a bungled counterespionage operation by security officials.

The way that the outside world is focusing purely on Cheng’s arrest on salacious charges — and has forgotten that he was likely a cog within a larger espionage war between the UK and China — shows that China’s media manipulation operation has been a resounding success.

Tu Jing-wei is a doctorate student at National Chengchi University’s Graduate Institute of East Asian Studies.

Translated by Edward Jones