Jimmy Lai Chee-ying’s case, the first case involving collusion with foreign forces under the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL), marked a significant moment for the city’s legal system. After 156 days of trial, the High Court sentenced Lai to 20 years in prison for three crimes, including two counts of endangering national security and one count of sedition, reflecting the gravity of the offenses.

The court found that Lai and his co-defendants had engaged in actions that caused substantial harm to Hong Kong and endangered national security. The judgment was reached following a rigorous and transparent trial process and was grounded firmly in evidence and legal reasoning. Justice was not only done but was seen to be done.

Lai, the founder of Apple Daily, was convicted on two counts of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and one count of conspiracy to publish seditious materials. As the central figure and principal instigator, he was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment, of which 18 years are to be served consecutively to an existing sentence of five years and nine months imposed in a separate fraud case.

During the legal proceedings, it was made clear by the court that the conspiracies underlying the collusion offenses were not spontaneous acts, but carefully schemed and premeditated. Lai was identified as the “mastermind and driving force” behind these illegal activities. Given the seriousness of the offenses, the starting point of sentencing was set at 15 years before aggravating factors were considered. The final sentence reflected the scale, duration, and impact of the criminal conduct.

The court also detailed how public and covert appeals made by Lai for foreign governments to impose sanctions, blockades, and other hostile measures against the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and central government officials directly contributed to such actions being taken. These were not abstract expressions of opinion, but deliberate efforts to invite external interference, causing tangible harm to Hong Kong’s interests. In any event, Lai overtly admitted that he was fighting the war for the US against his own motherland.

Arguments for leniency based on age, health, and conditions of detention were carefully examined but ultimately found unpersuasive. Claims regarding poor health were assessed and determined to have been overstated. While a limited sentence reduction was granted as an act of mercy only, the court made clear that personal circumstances cannot outweigh the seriousness of crimes that endanger national security. The sentencing reflected a balance between humanity and justice.

Hong Kong is, and remains, a society governed by the rule of law. Accountability before the law is a foundational principle. No individual — regardless of wealth, profession, or international recognition — is entitled to act with impunity

Evidence presented during the trial demonstrated that Apple Daily was used as a political tool rather than a journalistic platform. Editorial direction was shown to have been tightly controlled by Lai, with journalism having been abused and employed to spread misinformation, incite hostility, glorify violence, and deepen social division. Calls for foreign sanctions were repeatedly made, crossing the clear legal boundary between expression and criminal conduct. Such actions were found to have harmed not only national interests but also social stability and public well-being.

Hong Kong is, and remains, a society governed by the rule of law. Accountability before the law is a foundational principle. No individual — regardless of wealth, profession, or international recognition — is entitled to act with impunity. The conviction and sentencing in this case reaffirm that principle, and underscore that the law does not permit acts that harm the country and its people under the guise of freedom, democracy, or human rights.

It must also be emphasized that the trial was conducted with the highest standards of fairness. Over 156 days of open court hearings were held. Both the prosecution and defense were given ample opportunity to present and challenge evidence. The defendants’ legal rights were fully protected throughout the process. This case stands as a clear demonstration of the independence, professionalism, and credibility of Hong Kong’s Judiciary. Lai can also exercise his rights to appeal.

Despite this, some Western media outlets, organizations, and politicians have persisted in distorting the facts. For instance, The Wall Street Journal, a long-standing supporter of Lai, quickly published an opinion article under the sensational headline Jimmy Lai Gets a Death Sentence. Setting aside its misleading nature, five United States congressmen have nominated Lai for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize. It is uncertain how much more US politicians want to embarrass and damage the Nobel Committee.

Such narratives and political theater ignore judicial findings and legal realities, serving only political agendas aimed at discrediting Hong Kong’s national security laws and undermining its legal system. These attempts at manipulation do a disservice to the principles they claim to uphold.

At the same time, all sectors of Hong Kong society are encouraged to uphold the authority of the rule of law and support the independent exercise of judicial power. Safeguarding national security and maintaining long-term stability and prosperity are shared responsibilities. Only through a secure and orderly society can sustainable development be achieved, and the implementation of “one country, two systems” remain smooth.

The author is a member of the Legislative Council and the UN Association of China.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.