A Hong Kong court has found two editors of the now-defunct Stand News media outlet guilty of conspiring to publish seditious articles. The case has attracted international attention due to concerns about political repression in the Chinese Communist Party-ruled city. The editors, Chung Pui-kuen and Patrick Lam, could face up to two years in jail when they are sentenced on September 26. This marks the first conviction for sedition against any journalist or editor since Hong Kong’s handover from Britain to China in 1997.
Critics, including the U.S. government, argue that this case highlights the deteriorating state of media freedoms under Chinese Communist Party rule. Stand News was once a prominent online media outlet in Hong Kong known for its critical reporting and commentary. However, it was raided by police in December 2021 and had its assets frozen, ultimately leading to its closure.
Chung, Lam, and the outlet’s parent company were charged with conspiracy to publish seditious publications related to 17 news articles and commentaries between July 2020 and December 2021. While Chung pleaded not guilty and was present for the verdict on August 29th, Lam did not appear in court.
District Judge Kwok Wai-kin wrote that when speech is deemed seditious, it must be viewed as potentially damaging national security and therefore stopped. During the trial, government prosecutor Laura Ng argued that Stand News had acted as a platform promoting “illegal” ideologies while inciting hatred against both the CCP and Hong Kong governments.
The verdict has raised concerns among press freedom advocates who fear it sets a dangerous precedent for further suppression of independent voices by Beijing. Many media outlets have already been shut down or faced restrictions since China imposed national security laws on Hong Kong.
Throughout his testimony during the trial, Chung defended media freedoms by stating that Stand News had simply reported facts and truthfully reflected a range of voices including pro-democracy advocates. He emphasized their commitment to publishing every article they received as long as it did not incite violence or cause defamation.
In a mitigation letter submitted by Lam, he highlighted that press freedom and freedom of speech were at stake in this case. He argued that journalists can only defend press freedom through reporting.