In the sedition case against Stand News, Judge Kwok Wai-kin on Thursday (26th) sentenced former editor-in-chief Chung Pui-kuen to 21 months in prison. Considering that acting editor-in-chief Patrick Lam Shiu-tung has a rare disease making him highly susceptible to infections, further imprisonment could endanger his life, leading to his immediate release from custody. The defense hoped the court would consider the defendants’ roles as journalists and the potential for a miscarriage of justice, asking for a reduced sentence. However, Judge Kwok rebutted these points one by one in his sentencing remarks.

Judge Kwok also noted that Chung Pui-kuen operated Stand News to support and promote Hong Kong’s local autonomy. He pointed out that the law already provides guidelines on what media can and cannot publish, arguing that “only those who intend to play on the edge would fear falling into the legal net.”

Furthermore, Judge Kwok stated that the defendants were not engaged in genuine journalism during the incident but were part of what was then termed as resistance, standing with protesters against the government. He mentioned that most of the 11 articles deemed seditious were published during a period when over half of Hong Kong’s population distrusted the central government, the local government, the police, and the judiciary, emphasizing that the damage caused by the case was “quite severe.”

Over a Hundred Spectators, Court Starts Two Hours Late

The hearing, originally scheduled for 2:30 PM, saw citizens queuing up from 6 AM to observe the proceedings, with the main and extended courtrooms hosting over a hundred spectators, including former employees of Stand News, and representatives from the consulates of the UK, USA, Canada, and France also in attendance. (See separate article)

Dressed in a blue long-sleeve shirt and khaki pants, Chung Pui-kuen arrived at the courthouse around 12:30 PM without responding to journalists’ questions, gesturing with his hands clasped as he entered the building. Patrick Lam Shiu-tung, who was not present at the judgment day, arrived about an hour later wearing a white long-sleeve shirt and green pants, and donned a white mask.

Defense Supplement on Patrick Lam Shiu-tung’s Health Condition  

In court, the defense supplemented information about Patrick Lam Shiu-tung’s health, stating that he suffers from a rare and complex disease. They expressed concern that imprisonment could delay treatment and pose a life-threatening risk, and hoped the court would consider this in mitigation. Additionally, the defense mentioned that Chung Pui-kuen had promptly removed inappropriate articles when discovered. However, Judge Kwok Wai-kin countered, noting that Stand News reported on the “Dragon Slaying Squad” during “the most violent times in Hong Kong,” questioning the intent behind such coverage.

Judge Rejects Mitigation for Performing Journalistic Duties

Claims Operation of Stand News Promoted Local Autonomy

After a 50-minute recess, Judge Kwok Wai-kin read out the sentencing reasons, countering each mitigation factor presented by the defense. He first noted that the conspiracy to publish seditious publications, as alleged, involved not only the 11 articles deemed seditious by the court but suggested these articles were merely “overt acts” allowing the court to infer the existence of the conspiracy.

Addressing the defense’s claim that the defendants were fulfilling their duties as journalists, Judge Kwok stated that Chung Pui-kuen’s claim that Stand News had no political stance was a lie, noting that he operated Stand News to support and promote Hong Kong’s local autonomy.

Furthermore, Judge Kwok noted that during the anti-extradition law amendment bill period, Stand News became a tool for smearing and defaming the central and special administrative governments. He stated that Chung Pui-kuen and Patrick Lam Shiu-tung, having approved the publication of the seditious articles in question, were clearly aware of the content, thereby acknowledging its seditious intent. He concluded that even if not deliberately seditious, they at least recklessly disregarded the consequences of such sedition, and thus did not accept that performing journalistic work could be a factor reducing their sentences.

Judge Refuses to Accept Defendants Fell into Legal Trap

States Laws Already Provide Guidelines

Regarding the defense’s argument that neither the court nor the government had set clear guidelines for journalists, and that the defendants were unaware of what could not be reported and were not knowingly committing a crime but merely fell into a legal trap, Judge Kwok Wai-kin noted that while this case was the first sedition trial involving the media since 1997, the crime of sedition was already codified in 1938, and the 1952 “Ta Kung Pao case” established effective legal principles that should guide the defendants.

The judge believed that the laws had already provided guidelines, specifying which intentions could constitute a seditious intent, and what the media could or could not publish, with “the focus clearly on the publisher’s intent.” He continued, noting that speech and press freedoms are protected under the Basic Law and the Hong Kong Bill of Rights, thus, even without local cases involving the media post-1997, a wealth of overseas cases could still be referenced.

Judge: Only Those Intending to “Skirt the Edges” Fear Falling into Legal Traps

He believes that opinion articles must be based on objective foundations, stating that anyone engaged in journalism knows that “the primary responsibility of journalism is to tell the truth, not to fabricate or distort the truth.” He thinks that when journalists intend to publish articles critical of the government, they should first consider the intent behind their publications. If the intent is to slander or undermine the central and local governments, to damage their credibility and authority, then they naturally must bear criminal responsibility.

On the other hand, if the defendants’ criticisms and opinions are fact-based, verified appropriately to ascertain the truth, and presented with a sincere and fair attitude, even if the criticisms are harsh and sharp, they will not constitute incitement. He pointed out that even if prosecuted, the prosecution would face difficulties in proving the case, and the defendants could argue that their criticisms are reasoned and well-founded. “Only those who intend to ‘skirt the edges’ need worry about falling into legal traps because their focus is not on their intentions but on whether the content of their speech or articles can ‘cheat the system.'”

Kwok Wai-kin continued, noting that while Stand News undoubtedly published many news reports, this does not mean it lacked intent to incite. As an online media platform, it naturally had to appear as a news media entity, “but today’s media draw readers more by how they comment,” “Through Chung Pui-kuen and Patrick Lam Shiu-tung, Stand News was clearly not just engaged in pure journalism.”

Judge Cites Gwyneth Ho Interview: Stand News Allegedly Campaigning for Her

He used Gwyneth Ho’s interview as an example, pointing out that Stand News clearly campaigned for her in the pro-democracy camp’s 35+ primary election. The reporter brought out her political awakening from the events of June 4th, her visit to Ukraine to learn about democratic movements, and embedded a video in the report showing Ho urging support for other legislators like Dennis Kwok to filibuster the National Anthem Law in the Legislative Council.

The judge noted that the author allowed Ho to articulate why voters should choose her over other candidates, stating her refusal to compromise with the regime even at her own expense, and used emotive language to ask readers if they would vote for Gwyneth Ho. Moreover, on the first day of the primary election, Stand News republished Ho’s interview, a treatment not given to other interviewees, demonstrating Chung’s agreement with Ho’s incendiary rhetoric.

Kwok Wai-kin mentioned that although Ho had been interviewed by other media, “these media did not endorse Gwyneth Ho’s incendiary comments in their articles or actions, nor did they campaign for her to win in the 35+ primary.”

Judge: Stand News’ CUHK Coverage Reignited Violent Protests

Ming Pao Balanced Content with Police Interview

Regarding the two-year anniversary interview of the CUHK conflict, Judge Kwok Wai-kin stated that the article, lacking an objective basis, claimed CUHK’s academic freedom was threatened and glorified the rioters. Furthermore, the inclusion of multiple slogans such as “light up the times” in the embedded video indicated that Stand News aimed to reignite the subsided violent protests. Therefore, Stand News and then acting editor-in-chief, Patrick Lam Shiu-tung, were not merely fulfilling journalistic duties but intending to publish incendiary articles.

Judge Kwok contrasted this article with similar reports by other media, noting that while interviewees in other reports claimed they were “defending CUHK,” they did not suggest that the police or the regime compromised CUHK’s academic freedom, viewing the reports as merely documenting protesters’ statements. In a Ming Pao interview, the inclusion of an article titled “[University Fires One Year Later] Police Officer: Never Intended to Storm CUHK, Defense Battle is a Non-Issue” balanced the content.

He also noted that Stand News treated police complaints about the article merely as editorial notes, listed at the beginning and end of the article, but continued to publish the article. “The message is clearly that they regard the police complaints as negligible, increasing their contempt for the police.”

Judge: No Evidence Shows Judges Are Manipulated

Additionally, Judge Kwok Wai-kin referenced editorials from Stand News, including the July 23, 2019 editorial “Reporter Assaults a Serious Matter, Systemic Collapse Even More So,” which accused the police and individuals in white shirts of collusion, and further claimed that police brutality emerged “because Hong Kong lacks a democratic system.” On July 1, 2020, the editorial “Defend Every Inch of Free Soil, Utilize Every Sliver of Light” posited that the National Security Law would transform Hong Kong into an authoritarian and freedom-less place.

He also mentioned that Stand News published blog posts by Chan Pui-man, Nathan Law, Cheung Kun-sun, and Allan Au, which recklessly attacked and smeared the National Security Law and scorned the judiciary, “especially by describing designated judges as being manipulated by the regime, and these judges are allegedly willing to be manipulated or to comply on their own.” However, he emphasized that “this could not be correct,” since Allan Au and Chung Pui-kuen have no evidence to show the regime controls the judges, nor is there evidence that designated judges are submissive to the regime.

Judge Kwok cited the example of designated judge Alex Lee Wan-tang, arguing that if according to Au and Chung’s claims, Lee would be an enforcer for the regime, yet Lee once approved Jimmy Lai’s bail for release, “Allan Au has never explained this aspect, and Chung Pui-kuen simply ignores it.”

The judge believed that editorials and blog posts from Stand News conveyed messages that the central government is authoritarian, the SAR government is its puppet, and the police and judges are enforcers for the regime, thereby inciting hatred and disdain for the central and SAR governments among Hongkongers.

Judge Cites Allan Au’s Claim “Judges Kneel Quickly”

Lacks Substantial Basis, Full of Contempt

Regarding the defense’s argument that none of the articles deemed seditious represented Stand News’s opinions, Judge Kwok Wai-kin mentioned that the articles helped promote localism in Hong Kong. “Although Stand News was not the author, it was still the publisher.”

Judge Kwok further stated there was no evidence to establish that the remaining 99.99% of Stand News’s articles had seditious intent and avoided using articles not cited by the prosecution as overt acts to prevent accusations of broadening the prosecutorial basis. However, in response to the defense, he referred to a non-case-related blog post by Allan Au titled “The Final Court Welcomes the New Order of the Rivers and Lakes,” related to the Final Court overturning Judge Alex Lee Wan-tang’s decision to grant bail to Jimmy Lai.

The article stated, “Judges kneel quickly and thoroughly, power is always right, human rights and rule of law are merely decorative,” and “The judges’ understanding of social context stands entirely from the perspective of the elite, not from that of human rights or justice,” and “The judgment also briefly mentions Hong Kong people’s civil liberties and the presumption of innocence, but it’s all sweet talk.”

Judge Kwok noted that even with the Final Court’s decision, “Allan Au shows no respect, his tone is provocative and filled with contempt,” and does not provide any substantial arguments, nor could there be any objective reason to believe that the Final Court judges do not adhere to their judicial oaths. He stated, “There is no doubt about the status of Final Court judges in the judiciary; they cannot possibly be manipulated by any regime,” indicating the article clearly intended to incite hatred towards Hong Kong’s judiciary, and Chung Pui-kuen also turned a blind eye to it.

Judge States Defendants Were Not Engaged in Genuine Journalism but Participated in Protests

Regarding sentencing, in addition to the previously rejected mitigating factors, Judge Kwok Wai-kin also did not accept the applicability of the sentencing reduction provisions under the National Security Law to this case. He stated that Chung Pui-kuen did not voluntarily abandon the crime, asserting that his removal of some articles was intended to reduce the risk of law enforcement action against him and Stand News.

Judge Kwok believed that during the time of the offense, the three defendants were not engaged in genuine journalism but were “participating in what was then called the resistance.” From Stand News’s editorials and mission statements, it is evident that they “stood on the side of the protesters to confront the government.” The judge noted that the crimes committed by the two were quite serious, with the conspiracy lasting about one year and five months. Among the 11 articles deemed seditious, most were published during a period when “over half of Hong Kong society had the least trust in the central and SAR governments, the police force, and the judiciary.”

Furthermore, Stand News had approximately 1.6 million followers. The judge believed that the harm caused by the seditious articles to the central government, the SAR government, and residents was inevitably severe and difficult to quantify. Based on the seriousness of the crime, imprisonment was the only option. Judge Kwok specifically pointed out that the maximum penalty for the charge was two years’ imprisonment, which was “entirely disproportionate to the seriousness of the offense,” and noted that under the National Security Law, the maximum sentence for sedition has been increased to seven years.

Judge Considers Patrick Lam Shiu-tong’s Health Condition in Sentencing, Allowing for Immediate Release

Considering the above factors, Judge Kwok Wai-kin set the sentencing starting point for Chung Pui-kuen at 23 months in prison, while Patrick Lam Shiu-tong, who joined the conspiracy during his tenure as acting editor-in-chief and participated for about two months, publishing only one seditious article, was given a starting point of 14 months in prison. The judge noted the pressure both individuals faced due to the prolonged trial period, thus reducing Chung’s sentence by 2 months, totaling 21 months of imprisonment.

Although the National Security Law enacted this year has set new regulations for the early release of national security prisoners, it does not mean that defendants cannot receive a one-third reduction for good behavior. If the Director of Correctional Services is convinced of the early release without jeopardizing national security, a reduction is granted.

The judge, considering Lam’s health condition and the stress of the trial, further reduced his sentence by 3 months. Given Lam had been detained for 10 months and 9 days, he would have needed to serve only the remaining 21 days in prison. However, Judge Kwok considered the medical reports indicating Lam’s constant need for medical monitoring and high infection risk, deeming imprisonment “potentially hazardous to his life.” Given the importance of Lam receiving ongoing treatment from his primary physician, the judge ultimately sentenced him to an immediately releasable term, and Lam was released from court. Chung Pui-kuen smiled upon hearing Lam’s sentence, while Lam’s wife wiped tears in the public gallery.

As for Stand News, the corporate entity involved, the only sentencing option was a fine. Therefore, the judge imposed the maximum fine of $5,000, with a forfeiture order to be addressed on March 17, 2025.

The Witness