A Hong Kong court found two former editors guilty for publishing articles about pro-democracy activists that were deemed seditious, convicting journalists of sedition charges for the first time in decades and deepening press freedom concerns.
The city’s District Court on Thursday announced the conviction of Chung Pui-kuen and Patrick Lam, top editors at the shuttered pro-democracy publisher Stand News, and its parent company. The sedition case is the first involving a media outlet since the former British colony returned to Chinese rule.
The trial was seen as a barometer for press freedom in the once-freewheeling finance hub after Chinese authorities crushed dissent with a national security law in response to massive protests in 2019 advocating for greater democracy.
Chung and Lam were charged with taking part in a “conspiracy to publish and reproduce seditious publications,” an offense punishable by up to two years in jail. They pleaded not guilty when the trial began in 2022.
Prosecutors cited 17 articles published by Stand News in 2020 and 2021 as evidence, such as interviews with pro-democracy activists, including those who were found guilty in a separate case under the Beijing-imposed national security law.
The court ruled that 11 of the articles had “seditious intentions,” including some that attacked the national security law and others that “reviled” Beijing authorities without objective basis. It alleged that Stand News sought to promote “Hong Kong local autonomy” and became a tool to smear and vilify the central and local authorities.
The decision, announced to a courtroom packed with members of the public and the media, has prompted criticism from a local press union, the U.S. government and the European Union.
“Journalism is not a crime,” said a spokesperson for the U.S. consulate, who observed the ruling alongside representatives from the U.K. and E.U. missions. “The Hong Kong court’s conviction of the former chief editors of Stand News for sedition is a direct attack on media freedom.”
The E.U.’s diplomatic service said the “ruling risks further inhibiting the pluralistic exchange of ideas and the free flow of information.”