HKSAR v Lai Chee Ying & Others was a Hong Kong Court of First Instance national security and sedition case concerning Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and three Apple Daily-related companies. The court convicted Lai and the three corporate defendants of conspiracy to publish seditious publications and conspiracy to commit collusion by requesting foreign sanctions, blockade or other hostile activities, and convicted Lai alone on a separate collusion conspiracy count.
The court found that Lai exercised substantial influence over Apple Daily and used the newspaper as a platform for his political objectives. It held that an agreement to seek foreign sanctions and other hostile activities pre-dated the National Security Law (NSL) and continued after it came into force. Although Lai ceased making direct or explicit requests for sanctions after 1 July 2020, the court found that he adopted a more indirect and subtle strategy while the substance of the campaign remained unchanged.
On 9 February 2026, Lai was sentenced to a total of 20 years' imprisonment in . Apple Daily Limited, Apple Daily Printing Limited and AD Internet Limited were each fined HK$3,004,500. Lai subsequently decided not to appeal against either his convictions or sentence.
Background The case arose from the 2019 social unrest due to the proposal of the Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Legislation Amendment Bill and the later enactment of the Hong Kong National Security Law (NSL) on 30 June 2020.
On 28 February 2020, Jimmy Lai, along with former Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China chairman Lee Cheuk-yan and former Democratic Party chairman Yeung Sum, were arrested by the Hong Kong police at their homes. They were accused of participating in an unauthorised assembly on 31 August 2019. Lai was also charged with criminal intimidation for allegedly threatening a newspaper reporter on 4 June 2017.
On 18 April 2020, the Hong Kong police arrested Lai as part of a wider operation targeting pro-democracy figures over unauthorised assemblies in 2019. Lai was subsequently charged over his involvement in unauthorised assemblies on 18 August and 1 October 2019.
In July 2020, in an interview with Next Magazine, Lai criticised the CCP's enactment of the Hong Kong National Security Law and publicly denounced Xi Jinping, the general secretary of the CCP Central Committee. On 10 August 2020, the Hong Kong Police National Security Department arrested Lai and six others, including his sons and senior Next Digital personnel, on suspicion of offences including collusion with foreign forces under the NSL. Hundreds of officers subsequently entered the Apple Daily headquarters as part of an hours-long search. The search involved nearly 200 officers, lasted about nine hours and resulted in 25 boxes of evidence being removed.
On 17 June 2021, police arrested five Apple Daily executives, including editor-in-chief Ryan Law and associate publisher Chan Pui-man, under the NSL. Around 500 police officers raided and searched the newspaper's newsroom and seized computers. Following the arrests and the freezing of assets linked to the newspaper, Apple Daily ceased operations and published its final edition on 24 June 2021.
Parties and charges The prosecution alleged that Apple Daily was used as a platform for publications said to be seditious and for content that requested foreign states or external actors to impose "sanctions or blockade, or engage in other hostile activities" against the PRC and/or the HKSAR.
The prosecution proceeded on three conspiracy counts: conspiracy to print, publish, sell, offer for sale, distribute, display and/or reproduce seditious publications, contrary to the Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200); conspiracy to commit collusion contrary to Article 29(4) of the NSL by requesting sanctions, blockade or other hostile activities against the HKSAR or PRC; and a separate conspiracy to commit collusion charge against Lai involving specified external co-conspirators.
The indictment also contained a substantive collusion charge against Lai related to the third count. The prosecution elected to proceed on the conspiracy charge instead, and the substantive charge was left on the indictment with the court's leave.
Pre-trial proceedings Stay application and time-limit challenge Before trial, Lai applied for a stay of proceedings on the grounds that the proceedings would violate his right to a hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal and that a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that the trial would not be free from political interference. The court dismissed the application on 29 May 2023.
At the beginning of the trial, Lai and the corporate defendants also argued that Count 1, the sedition conspiracy charge, was time-barred. The court rejected the challenge in . Lai subsequently applied to reopen the issue, but the application was dismissed on 2 January 2024.
Tim Owen and NPCSC interpretation Lai sought to instruct British barrister Tim Owen KC to represent him at trial. On 19 October 2022, the Court of First Instance granted Owen ad hoc admission under section 27(4) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance in . The Secretary for Justice appealed, but the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on 9 November in and refused leave to appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on 21 November in . On 28 November, the Appeal Committee of the Court of Final Appeal also refused leave to appeal in .
In refusing leave, the Court of Final Appeal held that the Secretary for Justice's proposed national security arguments were substantially new points that had not been raised or explored in the courts below. It therefore declined to entertain them under the principles governing new points on appeal, while noting that national security considerations, where properly raised in an application for ad hoc admission, were of the highest importance.
Following the Court of Final Appeal's decision, Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu submitted a report to the Central People's Government recommending that an interpretation of the NSL be sought from the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC). On 30 December 2022, the NPCSC issued an interpretation of Articles 14 and 47 of the NSL. The interpretation provided that whether an overseas lawyer not qualified to practise generally in Hong Kong could act in a national security case was a question requiring certification by the Chief Executive under Article 47. Where a court had not requested or obtained such a certificate, the Committee for Safeguarding National Security was to make a judgment and decision on the question under Article 14.
Owen had applied to the Immigration Department for approval to undertake the case as sideline employment under his employment visa, but withdrew the application on 3 January 2023. On 11 January, the Committee for Safeguarding National Security decided that Owen's proposed representation of Lai concerned national security, was likely to constitute national security risks and was contrary to the interests of national security. It advised the Director of Immigration that any fresh application by Owen for approval to undertake the case should be refused.
Lai subsequently commenced proceedings seeking, among other things, a declaration that the NPCSC interpretation did not affect the earlier judgments admitting Owen, and separately sought leave to apply for judicial review of the decisions of the Committee and the Director of Immigration. On 19 May 2023, the Court of First Instance dismissed both proceedings in . The court held that the Hong Kong courts had no jurisdiction under Article 14 of the NSL to judicially review the work and decisions of the Committee. It also held that, although the NPCSC interpretation did not invalidate or overrule the earlier judgments admitting Owen, the interpretation and the subsequent decisions of the Committee and Director of Immigration governed the position following those judgments.
Lai appealed against the refusal of leave to challenge the decisions of the Committee and the Director of Immigration. On 16 April 2024, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in . The court held that, when Article 14 was read together with the NPCSC interpretation, the Hong Kong courts had no jurisdiction to review any judgment, decision or act of the Committee.
Non-jury trial In August 2022, the Secretary for Justice Paul Lam issued a certificate under Article 46 of the NSL directing that the case be tried without a jury. The certificate cited the involvement of foreign elements, the personal safety of jurors and their family members, and the risk of perverting the course of justice if the trial were conducted with a jury. The case was accordingly tried by a panel of three designated national security judges.
Trial The trial began on 18 December 2023 and concluded on 28 August 2025 after 156 hearing days. Lai and the three corporate defendants pleaded not guilty. Lai's defence team was led by Robert Pang Yiu-hung SC.
The prosecution closed its case on 11 June 2024, the 90th hearing day. After the court dismissed Lai's no-case submission on 25 July, the proceedings were adjourned until 20 November, when Lai began giving evidence.
Prosecution case The prosecution alleged that Lai had used Apple Daily as a platform to pursue his political objectives during and after the anti-extradition-bill protests and had worked with overseas contacts and co-conspirators to seek foreign intervention against the PRC and HKSAR. It alleged that agreements underlying the collusion charges had been formed before the NSL came into force and continued afterwards.
For Count 1, the prosecution alleged that Lai and senior Apple Daily management had agreed to use the newspaper to publish seditious material. For Count 2, it alleged that Lai, the corporate defendants and senior management had agreed to use Apple Daily to request foreign sanctions, blockade or other hostile activities and continued that agreement after 30 June 2020. For Count 3, it alleged that Lai, Mark Simon, Chan Tsz-wah, Li Yu-hin, Lau Cho-dik and others had agreed to pursue international lobbying, including through Stand with Hong Kong, to obtain such foreign measures.
The prosecution called six accomplice witnesses: former Apple Daily executives Cheung Kim-hung, Chan Pui-man and Yeung Ching-kee; Li Yu-hin, also known as Andy Li; Chan Tsz-wah, also known as Wayland Chan; and Chow Tat-kuen, also known as Royston Chow.
Evidence concerning Apple Daily Cheung, Chan Pui-man, Yeung and Chow gave evidence concerning Lai's role in the management and editorial direction of Apple Daily. Their evidence was that Lai was a hands-on proprietor whose political views influenced the newspaper's editorial policy through, among other things, lunchbox meetings, instructions to senior management, his own articles and the selection of contributors. During cross-examination of Chan Pui-man, the defence argued that Lai made general suggestions rather than specific editorial directions, while Chan maintained that Lai ultimately had the "final say" at the lunchbox meetings. Yeung described the newspaper's editorial independence as "independence in a birdcage", in which editorial staff retained a degree of discretion within the overall stance set by Lai.