On Monday, the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region sentenced Jimmy Lai Chee-ying to 20 years in prison. The ruling serves as a solemn statement: No one is above the law, and anyone who challenges national security is bound to face severe punishment. When the verdict was announced, a member of the public in the gallery spontaneously stood up and hailed it with a resounding “Yes!”. This cheer reflects the sentiment of the general public in Hong Kong, and is a salute to the rule of law.

The 156-day trial proved that Lai was the primary mastermind, organizer, participant, and financier behind a series of anti-China activities conducted in Hong Kong. His criminal acts caused profound harm to both the HKSAR and the nation. The court found that Lai and his associates conspired and meticulously planned their subversive actions before and after the implementation of the Hong Kong SAR National Security Law (NSL), developing three lines of operations aimed at subverting State power.

The first line was the “mobilization of public opinion”, with the aim of inciting hatred against the authorities. The court ruled that between 2019 and 2021, Apple Daily published 161 seditious articles that repeatedly fomented hatred and hostility toward the central and SAR governments. These articles, which denigrated the authorities with seditious disinformation and misinformation, constituted a long-term, systematic campaign intended to harm China, including the HKSAR, and topple the government.

The second line involved “soliciting sanctions”. Evidence showed that Lai actively lobbied foreign governments to impose sanctions or other hostile measures on the HKSAR and central government officials through various channels. The court noted that these were not impromptu or emotional acts but calculated moves with clear targets.

The third line was “international lobbying”. The prosecution pointed out that Lai worked in coordination with his accomplices. Lai acted as the mastermind, providing direction, resources, and international influence, while his associates established organizations, issued statements, and lobbied foreign political circles. This cross-border conspiracy aimed to leverage foreign forces to exert pressure, thereby endangering national security and harming national interests.

The panel of three judges concluded that these operational lines were not independent but mutually reinforcing, forming a comprehensive “closed loop” of criminal activities. Some actions even directly led to foreign governments imposing sanctions on central and HKSAR officials.

Lai and his cohorts incited the media to spread fake news, stir up trouble, and incite riots. They believed that by hiding under the guise of “freedom of speech and of the press” they could deceive the public and act with impunity. However, the court clarified that the case was not about press freedom or freedom of speech, but about collusion and soliciting foreign sanctions, acts that clearly exceed the boundaries of legal protection

These facts reveal that the so-called “democracy, human rights, and freedom” Lai frequently cited were merely a pretext. In reality, he was a traitor who betrayed his homeland for his political pursuits, causing harm to national interests and the well-being of Hong Kong residents. The detailed evidence presented in court exposed Lai’s and his associates’ criminal endeavors: Using platforms like Apple Daily under their control, they waged cognitive warfare and colluded with foreign forces in a premeditated and organized manner. They funded and fueled social division, meticulously crafting an “iron triangle” of money, politics, and media. Their ultimate goal was to subvert State power and turn Hong Kong into an independent political entity.

Ever since the investigation was launched into Lai’s criminal activities, his Western apologists have relentlessly tried to whitewash his crimes. Throughout the investigation, prosecution, and trial stages, external anti-China forces have never ceased to smear the NSL and Hong Kong’s judicial system. Some even interfered in the city’s independent judicial operation by blatantly attempting to intimidate judges, prosecutors, law enforcement officers, and other government officials handling the case. Others played the empathy card by portraying Lai as a “righteous media mogul”, a “pious Catholic”, and on the verge of a “health collapse”.

Even as the day of sentencing approached, some continued to pressure the court by trying to manipulate public opinion with misinformation and lies about Lai having been mistreated. However, Lai himself did not play along with this theatric ploy. He never claimed to have been mistreated during custody; he walked steadily without aid when he went to the court to attend hearings, and showed absolutely no sign of the health collapse claimed by his apologists.

A striking contrast was witnessed between Lai and his codefendants. While the other eight defendants pleaded guilty, Lai has never shown a shred of remorse. The social turmoil he orchestrated ruined the futures of countless young people, turned property into ashes, and plunged families across the city into misery. Yet, Lai remained totally indifferent to their woes.

The trial was open, transparent, and procedurally rigorous, with the defendants’ legal rights fully protected by law. The court adjudicated independently, free from any interference, demonstrating the maturity, resilience, and unimpeachable credibility of Hong Kong’s rule of law, upholding judicial justice to the fullest.

Hong Kong is not only an international financial center but also a global benchmark for the rule of law. Lai’s verdict carries significant cautionary meaning.

First, it highlights that no one can override the law. Lai and his cohorts incited the media to spread fake news, stir up trouble, and incite riots. They believed that by hiding under the guise of “freedom of speech and of the press” they could deceive the public and act with impunity. However, the court clarified that the case was not about press freedom or freedom of speech, but about collusion and soliciting foreign sanctions, acts that clearly exceed the boundaries of legal protection.

Second, the verdict demonstrates that anti-China forces cannot impede the implementation of the NSL however hard they try. Despite Western attempts to interfere by threatening sanctions, Hong Kong’s law enforcement, prosecution, and judicial bodies remained fearless and dutiful in fulfilling their constitutional responsibilities, firmly safeguarding national security and upholding the rule of law. This sends a clear message to the world: Hong Kong is part of China, not a colony. The Hong Kong courts adjudicate independently, and any attempt by external forces to meddle is futile.

Finally, the case reminds Hong Kong people that national security risks persist, and they must remain vigilant against their resurgence.

The author is vice-chairman of the Committee on Liaison with Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and Overseas Chinese of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and chairman of the Hong Kong New Era Development Thinktank.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.