Jimmy Lai Sentenced to 20 Years in Hong Kong's Harshest National Security Crackdown — Family Says He Will 'Die a Martyr Behind Bars'

Jimmy Lai, the 78-year-old British-Hong Kong media tycoon and founder of the now-defunct Apple Daily newspaper, was sentenced on Monday to 20 years in prison — the longest punishment ever imposed under China's sweeping national security law. The sentence, handed down by three government-vetted judges at Hong Kong's High Court, was immediately condemned by human rights organizations, Western governments, and press freedom groups as what Human Rights Watch called "effectively a death sentence" for the aging publisher who has already spent more than five years behind bars.

Lai was convicted in December 2025 on charges of conspiring to collude with foreign forces to endanger national security and conspiracy to publish seditious materials. He had pleaded not guilty to all charges. The maximum penalty was life imprisonment. His eight co-defendants — six former Apple Daily executives and two activists — received sentences ranging from six years and three months to 10 years after entering guilty pleas. The sentencing marks the culmination of a years-long prosecution that critics say represents the definitive end of Hong Kong's once-vibrant tradition of press freedom.

The reaction was starkly divided. Lai's daughter Claire said the sentence was "heartbreakingly cruel" and that "if this sentence is carried out, he will die a martyr behind bars." Hong Kong's chief executive John Lee called the sentencing "deeply gratifying," describing Lai's crimes as "heinous and evil in the extreme." Beijing's foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian called the sentence "reasonable, legitimate, and legal," adding: "There is no room for argument."

Inside the Courtroom: A Tycoon Faces His Final Verdict

Before sunrise on Monday, dozens of supporters lined up outside the West Kowloon court building, some having camped for days to secure a seat. One supporter told the BBC he had stood in line since Thursday night, saying, "I just wish to greet Mr Lai in person in court... That's all I ask for, because I think it will be the last time I see him."

When Lai arrived, dressed in a white jacket and black glasses, he smiled brightly and waved at his family and supporters in the gallery. His wife Teresa and retired Chinese Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-Kiun, the former bishop of Hong Kong who had baptized Lai in 1997, were present. The hearing itself lasted less than 30 minutes. The judges described Lai as the "mastermind" behind three separate conspiracies and said his conduct was of "the most serious" category.

When the sentence was announced, Lai nodded calmly. But the public gallery was less stoic — observers were heard sobbing, and Teresa Lai held back tears as she left. Lai's lawyer Robert Pang declined to comment when asked whether they would appeal. The judges noted they had factored in Lai's age, declining health, and the burdens of his solitary confinement, reducing the sentence from what would have been a higher starting point. Critically, 18 of the 20 years are to be served consecutively to a separate five-year-and-nine-month fraud conviction Lai is already serving.

The Case Against Lai: National Security or Press Suppression?

The prosecution's case centered on Lai's use of Apple Daily and his international political connections to allegedly lobby foreign governments to impose sanctions on China and Hong Kong following the massive pro-democracy protests of 2019. At the heart of the charges was a meeting Lai had with then-U.S. Vice President Mike Pence and then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during the height of the demonstrations.

Lai testified in November 2025 that he had "never" used his foreign contacts to influence foreign policy on Hong Kong, insisting he was "just relaying" the situation. He argued throughout the trial that he had only advocated for what he believed were Hong Kong's core values: "rule of law, freedom, pursuit of democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly." The 855-page judgment acknowledged Lai was "a very savvy business man" but said it was "unfortunate that his deep resentment and hatred for the Chinese Communist Party" had "led him down a thorny path."

Hong Kong authorities have consistently maintained that the case was not about press freedom but about acts that threatened national security. Steve Li, chief superintendent of the police national security department, said the sentence was "appropriate" and alleged that claims about Lai's frail health were exaggerated. However, legal experts see a more troubling precedent. Urania Chiu, a lecturer in law at Oxford Brookes University, warned that the case's broad construction of seditious intent and the application of "collusion with foreign forces" to media activities is alarming. "Offering and publishing legitimate critiques of the state, which often involves engagement with international platforms and audiences, may now easily be construed as 'collusion,'" Chiu said.

International Outcry and the Diplomatic Fallout

The sentencing has deepened diplomatic tensions between Beijing and Western capitals. British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper called the prosecution "politically motivated" and described the 20-year prison term as "tantamount to a life sentence" for the 78-year-old British citizen. Cooper noted that Prime Minister Keir Starmer had raised Lai's case directly with President Xi Jinping during a visit to Beijing in January, and pledged the government would "rapidly engage further on Mr Lai's case" following the sentencing. Within hours, the UK Home Office announced an expansion of its Hong Kong visa scheme, making thousands more Hongkongers eligible for resettlement.

In the United States, the chair of the House Select Committee on China, John Moolenaar, said: "President Trump made it abundantly clear to General Secretary Xi in October that Lai should be freed and allowed to leave Hong Kong to be with his family." Trump himself, who is expected to visit China in April, said in December that he felt "so badly" about Lai's conviction and had asked Xi "to consider his release." Taiwan's government called the sentence "harsh" and an act of "trampling on freedom of speech and the press."

The Committee to Protect Journalists called the ruling "the final nail in the coffin for freedom of the press in Hong Kong," while Reporters Without Borders said the verdict meant "the curtain falls on press freedom in Hong Kong." Amnesty International described it as "another grim milestone in Hong Kong's transformation from a city governed by the rule of law to one ruled by fear." China, for its part, rejected all foreign criticism. Beijing's spokesperson urged "relevant countries" to respect the rule of law in Hong Kong and refrain from interfering in what it considers an internal matter.

From Stowaway to Media Mogul: The Rise and Fall of Jimmy Lai

Lai's life story is inextricable from Hong Kong's own trajectory. Born in Guangzhou, China, he arrived in Hong Kong at age 12 as a stowaway on a fishing boat, fleeing the poverty and political repression of Mao-era China. He started with menial factory jobs and eventually built a multi-million-dollar empire that included the clothing brand Giordano. His political awakening came in 1989, when China's brutal crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Beijing's Tiananmen Square catalyzed his transformation into a vocal democracy activist.

He launched Apple Daily in 1995, two years before Britain's handover of Hong Kong to China. Modeled on USA Today, the newspaper revolutionized Hong Kong media with its bold layout, investigative reporting, and unapologetically pro-democracy editorial stance. It became one of the city's top-selling papers almost instantly. Former colleagues described Lai as a visionary who encouraged bold journalism: "If you dared to do it, he would dare to let you do it." Even before the iPhone launched, he was predicting that mobile phones would be the future of news.

But Lai's willingness to confront Beijing made Apple Daily a target. After his arrest in August 2020, the paper's assets were frozen and senior journalists arrested. The newspaper was forced to close in June 2021, ending a 26-year run. Hong Kong's ranking on the press-freedom index compiled by Reporters Without Borders plummeted from 18th place in 2002 to 140th out of 180 territories by 2025 — a decline that many attribute directly to the national security law under which Lai was prosecuted.

Health Concerns and the Question of What Comes Next

Growing alarm surrounds Lai's deteriorating health. His family has reported dramatic weight loss, rotting teeth, heart palpitations, high blood pressure, and diabetes. He has spent most of his more than five years of detention in solitary confinement — an arrangement Hong Kong authorities say he requested, though his supporters question whether the choice was truly voluntary given the conditions. Lai's international legal team, led by Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC, was barred from defending him in court but has continued to advocate for his release.

Lai's supporters now pin their hopes on negotiations for his release on humanitarian grounds. His son Sebastien has said the British government has not done enough, warning that "time is running out." The question is whether any government possesses sufficient leverage — or political will — to extract meaningful concessions from Beijing on a case it views as an internal legal matter and a vindication of its national security framework.

The sentencing of six Apple Daily journalists alongside Lai sends its own chilling message. Mark Clifford, president of the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong and a former executive in Lai's media company, said: "The heavy sentences meted out not only to Lai but to his six Apple Daily colleagues underscore China's lack of concern about Hong Kong's rule of law." For working journalists in Hong Kong and across the region, the message is unmistakable: critical coverage of Beijing now carries potentially existential risks.

Conclusion

The sentencing of Jimmy Lai represents far more than the fate of a single publisher. It is the most definitive signal yet of the transformation of Hong Kong — once celebrated as Asia's freest city and a global financial hub built on the rule of law — into a place where dissent is treated as a crime against the state. In the six years since the national security law was imposed, hundreds have been arrested, dozens of civil society organizations dissolved, and the city's once-raucous free press reduced to silence or self-censorship. Apple Daily's closure and Lai's conviction stand as the most prominent casualties of that shift.

The international response, while vocal, raises uncomfortable questions about the limits of diplomatic pressure. Both the United States and the United Kingdom have expressed concern and raised Lai's case at the highest levels — yet Beijing shows no indication of yielding. For Western governments that maintain deep economic ties with China, the Lai case is a test of whether human rights advocacy amounts to more than rhetoric when confronted with a determined authoritarian state. Trump's expected visit to China in April will be closely watched for any signal of whether Lai's case might become a bargaining chip in the broader U.S.-China relationship.

Perhaps the most unsettling implication lies in the precedent the case sets. If meeting with foreign officials and publishing critical journalism can be construed as "collusion with foreign forces," what remains of the freedoms that were supposedly guaranteed under the "one country, two systems" framework set to last until 2047? For the thousands of Hongkongers who have already fled to the UK, Canada, and elsewhere, and for those who remain, Lai's sentence is not merely a legal ruling — it is a declaration of what Hong Kong has become, and a warning about what it may yet demand of those who still dare to speak freely.