Former Apple Daily Executives Seek Reduced Sentences in Landmark Hong Kong National Security Case
Convicted journalists urge the court to temper penalties, highlighting cooperation and limited roles as Hong Kong moves closer to sentencing
Former senior staff of the now-defunct Apple Daily newspaper have urged a Hong Kong High Court to impose lighter sentences after pleading guilty in a high-profile national security case that is widely viewed as a bellwether for press freedoms in the city.
Six ex-executives, including the publication’s former publisher and editors, argued that their cooperation with authorities and relatively limited involvement in the offences warranted reduced penalties before the court determines final sentences at a later date.
The defendants admitted guilt in 2022 to conspiracy to collude with foreign forces under Hong Kong’s national security law, acknowledging that they conspired with their former boss, media tycoon Jimmy Lai, to seek foreign sanctions, blockades or other actions perceived as hostile to Hong Kong and China.
Guilty pleas under the security law can qualify for reduced sentences, and lawyers appearing for the former executives highlighted factors such as timely admissions, cooperation with prosecutors and lesser roles in the alleged conduct as grounds for mitigation.
Among those seeking leniency was associate publisher Chan Pui-man, whose counsel suggested that, even if the court applied an upper sentencing band, her sentence should start at around ten years and be halved in recognition of her mitigation factors.
Defence submissions also cited personal circumstances, including health issues and financial burdens, to contextualise decisions made while working at Apple Daily.
Apple Daily, established in 1995 and closed in 2021 following police raids and asset freezes, was a leading pro-democracy voice in Hong Kong.
Its shuttering dealt a significant blow to the city’s once vibrant press landscape, and the ongoing case, with Lai awaiting sentencing on related convictions, has drawn international attention and commentary on the state of media and civil liberties under the national security law.
The judge has yet to set a date for sentencing, with proceedings paused after mitigation arguments concluded.
Observers note that how the court balances calls for leniency against the statutory penalties—ranging up to life imprisonment for national security offences—could influence perceptions of judicial independence and the future of dissent in Hong Kong.
Six ex-executives, including the publication’s former publisher and editors, argued that their cooperation with authorities and relatively limited involvement in the offences warranted reduced penalties before the court determines final sentences at a later date.
The defendants admitted guilt in 2022 to conspiracy to collude with foreign forces under Hong Kong’s national security law, acknowledging that they conspired with their former boss, media tycoon Jimmy Lai, to seek foreign sanctions, blockades or other actions perceived as hostile to Hong Kong and China.
Guilty pleas under the security law can qualify for reduced sentences, and lawyers appearing for the former executives highlighted factors such as timely admissions, cooperation with prosecutors and lesser roles in the alleged conduct as grounds for mitigation.
Among those seeking leniency was associate publisher Chan Pui-man, whose counsel suggested that, even if the court applied an upper sentencing band, her sentence should start at around ten years and be halved in recognition of her mitigation factors.
Defence submissions also cited personal circumstances, including health issues and financial burdens, to contextualise decisions made while working at Apple Daily.
Apple Daily, established in 1995 and closed in 2021 following police raids and asset freezes, was a leading pro-democracy voice in Hong Kong.
Its shuttering dealt a significant blow to the city’s once vibrant press landscape, and the ongoing case, with Lai awaiting sentencing on related convictions, has drawn international attention and commentary on the state of media and civil liberties under the national security law.
The judge has yet to set a date for sentencing, with proceedings paused after mitigation arguments concluded.
Observers note that how the court balances calls for leniency against the statutory penalties—ranging up to life imprisonment for national security offences—could influence perceptions of judicial independence and the future of dissent in Hong Kong.
AI Disclaimer: An advanced artificial intelligence (AI) system generated the content of this page on its own. This innovative technology conducts extensive research from a variety of reliable sources, performs rigorous fact-checking and verification, cleans up and balances biased or manipulated content, and presents a minimal factual summary that is just enough yet essential for you to function as an informed and educated citizen. Please keep in mind, however, that this system is an evolving technology, and as a result, the article may contain accidental inaccuracies or errors. We urge you to help us improve our site by reporting any inaccuracies you find using the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of this page. Your helpful feedback helps us improve our system and deliver more precise content. When you find an article of interest here, please look for the full and extensive coverage of this topic in traditional news sources, as they are written by professional journalists that we try to support, not replace. We appreciate your understanding and assistance.
