Unfounded allegations against Hong Kong authorities, the promotion of resistance and the dissemination of fears over the national security law were among the reasons provided in a court verdict that concluded Stand News was an anti-Chinese localist media outlet used as a tool for smearing and vilification.
A 129-page judgment handed down by the District Court on Thursday sought to underline the danger posed by 11 articles published by the now-defunct portal and show the seditious intent of its co-founder and top editors since it was set up in December 2014.
The court also weighed in on what it said was the proper interpretation of a series of controversial events that took place before the enactment of the Beijing-decreed national security law in June 2020, concluding society was at risk of being thrown into disorder again in light of the febrile atmosphere and public’s distrust of the regime.
Former editor-in-chief Chung Pui-kuen, ex-acting editor-in-chief Patrick Lam Shiu-tung and Best Pencil HK, Stand News’ holding company, were found guilty of a joint conspiracy charge of publishing and reproducing seditious material, the first such conviction involving media professionals since the city’s return to Chinese rule in 1997.
The editors face being sent back to jail after spending up to 11 months being incarcerated pending the trial, and the company, which was unrepresented in the proceedings, may have its assets seized.
Judge Kwok Wai-kin, one of the few court officials selected by the chief executive to oversee cases under the security law, ruled people could be held liable for sedition if they intended to incite others or were being reckless about the consequences of their actions.
He amended his judgment in a previous sedition case, where he had held that prosecutors must show a seditious remark or publication was deliberately made, saying his latest interpretation could better safeguard national security.
He highlighted the need to consider “surrounding circumstances” and whether the offence was committed at a time when “a spark will explode a powder magazine”, a phrase borrowed from a 1909 British judgment.
The judge said the press should act in good faith and provide “reliable and precise” information with “accurate factual basis” in accordance with the profession’s ethical standards.
The “marketplace of ideas”, a metaphor used to describe the ideal situation where truth will emerge from a competition of views, could also be distorted when content contained propaganda, disinformation or misinformation, he said.
The judge dedicated 66 paragraphs across 20 pages to his analysis of the city’s political situation in 2019 and 2020.
Kwok cited a public opinion survey in early June 2019 that said as much as two-thirds of the city’s 7.5-million strong population were sceptical of the government before large-scale protests linked to a now-withdrawn extradition bill.
He also made extensive references to two surveys by the Chinese University of Hong Kong, including one released in May 2020 in relation to the protests, and said the anti-government movement had bolstered support for localism and radical ideologies, with many residents “hiding their true political affiliations”.
The judge said the protests were never intended to be peaceful from the start, with calls for Hong Kong’s independence and challenges towards the country’s sovereignty obvious at the outset.
The opposition’s landslide victory in that year’s district council election showed the irrationality of those who offered sympathy or even support to radical protesters, amid unprecedented violence that saw a man set on fire and another killed by a flying brick, Kwok said.
“Everything was stance-first, objective-oriented and without regard to the proper means,” he wrote. “I am certain the age of populism had descended on Hong Kong by that time.”
The judgment said those who took part in the movement would not come to terms with the political situation just because the security law had been enacted.
Instead, they remained susceptible to incitement on topics relating to Beijing, the city administration and its police.
Kwok pointed to the emergence of a “yellow economy”, a loose coalition of businesses that supported the protests, the large turnout in an unofficial legislative primary election in July 2020 and what he described to be unsubstantiated claims about police brutality.
He rejected the defence’s suggestion that society had calmed down after the security law’s enactment and that terrorist acts were unlikely to take place in the city, highlighting events including the knife attack on a police officer in July 2021, praises offered by a university student body for the assault, and the arrest of teenagers who participated in a terrorist plot.
The judge also pointed to the entrenched antagonism towards Beijing among most of the general public then and said they would “by nature” easily believe in any negative information and criticisms against the central government.
He said it was against this backdrop that Stand News, a go-to source for those aligned with its opposition ideologies, enjoyed “extremely substantial” influence over its viewers until its closure in late December of 2021.
The 11 seditious articles, which were among 17 submitted by prosecutors, were published amid the heated political environment at the time and posed risks to national security and public order, Kwok said.
01:53
Hong Kong court convicts Stand News, 2 ex-editors of sedition over 17 articles
Hong Kong court convicts Stand News, 2 ex-editors of sedition over 17 articles
He added the reports in general had brought authorities into hatred and contempt without providing an objective foundation to support their criticisms.
Veteran journalist Allan Au Ka-lun, the author of four offensive commentaries, was noted for his “extremely negative” depictions of Beijing, unwarranted attacks on the security law and the criminal justice system, as well as his “provocation” of independence sentiments with an overemphasis on Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy under the “one country, two systems” governing principle.
In particular, the judge found no reason for Au to take authorities to task for arresting senior executives of the now-closed Apple Daily newspaper in June 2021.
“Au Ka-lun completely disregarded the fact that [associate publisher] Chan Pui-man and other management members of Apple [Daily] were arrested not because of their identity as media workers, but because of suspicion they committed a national security offence,” Kwok said.
Similar criticisms were made of three pieces by fugitive former lawmaker Nathan Law Kwun-chung, who the judge said had spread fear about the security law and had falsely claimed that protesters were “unreasonably suppressed, made to disappear, assaulted and sentenced to long-term imprisonment”.
“His objective was to spread hatred and anti-government sentiment with disinformation and galvanise the protesters in Hong Kong into devoting themselves in a drawn-out resistance campaign,” Kwok wrote.
The judge said a feature story on journalist turned activist Gwyneth Ho Kwai-lam, who called for continued resistance and “mutual destruction” with the Chinese Communist Party, was capable of fostering hatred and contempt in light of her “absolute resistance” against the central government and “extreme hatred” towards authorities.
He also noted a piece on the stand-off between protesters and police at Chinese University in November 2019 had made false allegations against officers and “glorified the behaviour of the rioters”.
The judgment said the biased account was based on false premises provided by two anonymous graduates of the university, who incorrectly claimed that police had stormed the campus and who offered no evidence that academic freedom had been infringed upon.
But Kwok found insufficient evidence that six other articles submitted by prosecutors had crossed legal boundaries.
He gave the example of an interview with localist activist Owen Chow Ka-shing, which focused on his disapproval of traditional opposition parties rather than the government.
Another interview with former district councillor Fergus Leung Fong-wai was deemed harmless due to a lack of explicit criticism towards authorities.
Interviews with fugitive politicians Law, Ted Hui Chi-fung and Sixtus Baggio Leung Chung-hang either highlighted their plans for the future or their hopes for Hong Kong without calling for readers to take specific actions, the judge said.
A sixth article which cited opposition activist Chow Hang-tung as saying Beijing suppressed democratic societies and damaged the rule of law was considered to be a legitimate news report.
Meanwhile, the judge devoted nearly 30 pages to explain what he found to be the criminal mind of the defendants at the time of the 11 articles’ publication between July 2020 and December 2021.
Kwok found Stand News’ inauguration statement, which said it “firmly believes our city’s future should be in Hongkongers’ hands”, represented its true manifesto of self-determination.
He further held that Stand News co-founder Tony Tsoi Tung-hoo and former chief editor Chung had managed the outlet to further the cause of Hong Kong-centric localism for the interests of its backers, whose identities were deliberately concealed to avoid detection.
The judge cited three editorials, including ones justifying the outlet’s criticisms of police and expressing fears over the security law, and said their claims about tyranny lacked evidence.
Kwok maintained Chung displayed bias over an infamous mob attack at Yuen Long MTR station on July 21, 2019, by calling it an “indiscriminate” assault of innocent residents.
He decided Chung or Stand News shared the unfounded belief that so-called police brutality was the result of the government’s indifference to the situation and the absence of a democratic system.
The judgment added that Lam, who was Chung’s successor, supported the 2019 protests based on his remarks made during an online media summit in December that year.
“I find that Stand News’ political ideology was localism. Its position was to support and facilitate Hong Kong’s self-determination, and it became a tool for smearing and vilifying the central and SAR government during the anti-extradition bill movement,” the judge concluded.
