HK govt slams Western critics over Jimmy Lai verdict

The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government has strongly condemned what it called false and defamatory remarks from several Western countries, anti-China media, organizations and politicians following the guilty verdict in the Jimmy Lai Chi-ying case.

In a statement issued on Monday, a government spokesperson said the external forces' comments disregarded the rule of law and maliciously attacked Hong Kong. The spokesperson argued these remarks demonstrated that national security risks are real and accused critics of placing politics above the law, distorting facts and confusing right and wrong.

The spokesperson reiterated that the court's verdict contained no political considerations. The 855-page judgment, publicly available, detailed the analysis of legal principles and evidence. The court stated Lai was not tried for his political views but because his sole intent was to seek the downfall of the Communist Party of China, even at the expense of the interests of Chinese and Hong Kong people.

It was also ruled that written articles considered in the case were objectively seditious, aimed at inciting hatred and contempt for the Hong Kong SAR Government and provoking disaffection. The court found Lai consciously used Apple Daily and his personal influence to conduct sustained activities to undermine the legitimacy and authority of the central and SAR governments and damage their relationship with Hong Kong residents—actions far exceeding legally permitted limits.

The government emphasized that Hong Kong is a society governed by the rule of law. Both the Hong Kong National Security Law and the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance stipulate that preventing, suppressing and punishing acts endangering national security must adhere to the rule of law. Advocating that certain individuals or organizations should be exempt from legal sanctions for illegal acts would grant them special privileges to break the law, completely violating the spirit of the rule of law.

The spokesperson stated the case had nothing to do with press freedom. The defendants had long used news reporting as a front to harm the country and Hong Kong. The trial revealed Lai closely managed and personally controlled the editorial direction of Apple Daily, with one senior staff member calling it a "birdcage" autonomy. Lai repeatedly colluded with foreign forces, begging for sanctions and hostile actions against the central and SAR governments.

Hong Kong residents enjoy press and speech freedom protected by the Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. The national security laws also explicitly stipulate that safeguarding national security must respect and protect human rights, including freedoms of the press, speech and publication. Like elsewhere, journalists must abide by all laws and bear "special duties and responsibilities," including protecting national security and public order, under principles of responsible journalism.

The spokesperson concluded that Lai had long used Apple Daily to create social conflict, incite hatred, glorify violence, and openly beg for foreign sanctions against China and Hong Kong. His actions harmed the country's fundamental interests and Hong Kong residents' well-being. The court's verdict upheld legal justice and protected Hong Kong's core values. The law does not allow anyone to openly harm their country and compatriots under the guise of human rights, democracy or freedom. The HKSAR has the responsibility to safeguard national security and will resolutely combat acts endangering it.