Foreign governments criticize Hong Kong's convictions of journalists in sedition case

HONG KONG -- The convictions of two Hong Kong journalists who led a now-shuttered online news outlet have deepened concerns of media groups and foreign governments over the city’s press freedom, though local officials say there are no restrictions when journalists stick to the facts.

Stand News former editor-in-chief Chung Pui-kuen and former acting editor-in-chief Patrick Lam were found guilty of conspiracy to publish and reproduce seditious publications, with the judge saying their outlet had become a tool for smearing the government. Their sedition trial was Hong Kong’s first involving media since the former British colony returned to Chinese rule in 1997.

Here are some of the reactions from governments and media groups:

U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller wrote on X that the convictions were a “direct attack on media freedom” and undermined the city's international reputation for openness.

“We urge Beijing and Hong Kong authorities to restore and uphold rights guaranteed in the Basic Law," he said, referring to the mini-constitution which adopted by China to govern Hong Kong after its handover from Britain in 1997 and which was aimed at preserving the territory's capitalist system and way of life until 2047.

“Journalism is not a crime,” Britain’s Indo-Pacific minister, Catherine West, wrote on X, adding that Chung and Lam were convicted “for doing their job.”

She urged Hong Kong authorities to “end politicised prosecutions of journalists and uphold press & publication freedoms” as spelled out by the Basic Law.

The European Union said in a statement that the conviction is another sign of the dwindling space for press freedom, guaranteed in the Basic Law.

“The ruling risks further inhibiting the pluralistic exchange of ideas and the free flow of information, both cornerstones of the economic success of Hong Kong,” it said.

The office of China's Foreign Ministry in Hong Kong firmly opposed the criticism from U.S., Britain and European Union in a statement, saying they have degraded right and wrong. It said Stand News is a political organization, and politicians in the West has long held double standards on the issue of press freedom.

“While they turn a blind eye to their own countries’ records of suppressing news media, they repeatedly use ‘press freedom’ as a political tool to make excuses for groups that are anti-China and destabilizing Hong Kong," it said.

Hong Kong Chief Secretary for Administration Eric Chan said the government respects press freedom, as guaranteed by the law. He said when journalists conduct their reporting based on facts, there won't be any restrictions on such freedom.

“Criticizing the government is not something that is banned," he said.

Reporters Without Borders condemned the verdict, saying it set a “dangerous precent” and dealt another blow against the city's shattered press freedom.

Cédric Alviani, the global media watch dog's Asia-Pacific bureau director, called the judicial decision “appalling." “From now on, anyone reporting on facts that are not in line with the authorities’ official narrative could be sentenced for sedition,” he said.

Hong Kong Journalists Association, a leading media professional group in the city, said the case against Stand News exemplified the decline of the city's press freedom.

“The damage done to the city’s press and to a media company is irreversible, long before the verdict was handed down today,” it said.

Amnesty International's China director Sarah Brooks said the verdict is “one more nail in the coffin” for the city's press freedom.

“The court’s judgment that 11 articles on the Stand News website were ‘seditious’ will invariably force journalists working in Hong Kong to think twice about what they write and further entrench a climate of fear in the city, fueled by a succession of repressive national security laws," she said.

Brooks was referring to the 2020 national security law imposed by Beijing and a new security law enacted in March.