A Hong Kong court sentenced a former editor from a now-defunct news platform to 21 months in prison on Thursday in a high-profile sedition case that many see as a key indicator of press freedom in the city.
Meanwhile, a second editor was freed after his sentence was reduced due to health concerns and time already spent in detention.
The case involves Chung Pui-kuen, the former editor-in-chief of Stand News, and Patrick Lam, who served as acting editor-in-chief.
These two journalists are the first to be convicted under a colonial-era sedition law since Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule in 1997.
While Chung received a 21-month sentence, he is expected to serve approximately 10 months, accounting for his time already spent in detention.
Lam, who was also sentenced, was allowed to walk free due to his deteriorating health and the duration he had already spent in custody.
Stand News, once a prominent platform known for its critical stance against the authorities, was shuttered in December 2021 amidst an intensifying crackdown on dissident voices in Hong Kong.
This closure occurred just months after the fall of ‘Apple Daily’, another pro-democracy publication whose founder, Jimmy Lai, is currently imprisoned and facing charges of collusion under the stringent national security law imposed by Beijing in 2020.
In August, the court found both Chung and Lam guilty of conspiring to publish seditious materials. Stand News’ holding company, Best Pencil (Hong Kong) Ltd., was also implicated and fined 5,000 Hong Kong dollars (roughly $640).
The journalists were facing a maximum sentence of two years in prison and a monetary penalty, with the court citing their influence over public sentiment as a contributing factor to their conviction.
The sentencing hearing, which took place on Thursday, was delayed by two hours. During the session, the defense, led by lawyer Audrey Eu, appealed for leniency, particularly for Lam, who was suffering from a rare medical condition.
She argued that his illness may not be adequately treated if he was sent back to prison. Eu also underscored that the journalists were fulfilling their duty by reporting on diverse perspectives, and urged that their sentences be capped at time already served.
However, Judge Kwok Wai-kin rejected the defense’s claims, asserting that the journalists were not merely caught up in their reporting duties but were instead active participants in what he described as a “so-called resistance” against the authorities.
He emphasized the influence of Stand News, stating that its widespread readership had caused substantial harm to both the Hong Kong and Beijing governments.
“The three defendants were not engaged in genuine media work but were instead participating in the so-called resistance of that time,” he remarked during sentencing.
The defense maintained that the contentious articles represented only a fraction of the outlet’s total publications.
The journalists, in their mitigation letters, highlighted their commitment to their journalistic mission, insisting that their actions were in service of public interest.
Despite these arguments, the atmosphere in the courtroom was somber. Dozens of people lined up outside early in the morning, hoping to secure a seat for the proceedings.
A former reader of Stand News, Andrew Wong, said he attended the hearing to show solidarity with the editors. “It feels like attending a funeral,” Wong reflected, noting that while the verdict had been expected, the conviction marked a definitive end to an era of press freedom in Hong Kong. “Everything we had in the past is gone,” he added.
The trial, which spanned 50 days and began in October 2022, was interrupted multiple times, including delays to await decisions on appeals in other high-profile sedition cases. With the sentencing, concerns about the state of media freedom in Hong Kong have only deepened.
The Hong Kong Journalists Association expressed its dismay, warning that the sentences reflected the “ongoing decline of press freedom” and the very real dangers faced by those reporting in the city. In a statement, the association commented, “There is nothing wrong with safeguarding national security, but allowing journalists to speak out and enabling society to speak freely is necessary to maintain Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.”
Cédric Alviani, the Asia-Pacific director of Reporters Without Borders, also voiced concern, describing Chung and Lam as serving the public’s interest, not inciting unrest. He
