Traitor of Hong Kong Who Vowed “Fighting for America”: Jimmy Lai’s 20 Years Well Earned

After three years of proceedings, the court has spoken: Jimmy Lai, Hong Kong's most serious national security offender to date, will spend the next two decades

For the two charges of "conspiracy to collude with foreign or external forces" under the Hong Kong National Security Law, the court set a 15-year starting point based on the case's overall severity. An additional "sedition" charge carried a 21-month baseline.

The judges made clear that Lai wasn't just another defendant. The court stated explicitly that he was "the mastermind and driving force behind these conspiracies”, and therefore “the starting point” of his sentences was "enhanced". This bumped the two collusion charges from 15 to 18 years, while the sedition charge rose from 21 to 23 months. After accounting for concurrent sentences and minor adjustments, the final tally landed at 20 years.

The Evidence Speaks

Consider what the court had to work with.

In July 2019, Lai met with US Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. What happened next tells you everything you need to know about where his loyalties lay.

At a Foundation for Defense of Democracies symposium, Lai proclaimed that he and Hong Kong people were "fighting your (the US’s) war in your enemy's camp". Let that sink in: a Hong Kong resident explicitly stating he's fighting for a foreign power. A traitor who publicly declares he's "fighting for America" gets a 20-year sentence—and it's well deserved.

Essentially Life Imprisonment

Under the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance, prisoners serving sentences for National Security Law offences cannot have their cases referred to the Long-Term Prison Sentences Review Board for early release consideration—unless the Commissioner of Correctional Services is satisfied that early release wouldn't compromise national security.

What does this mean in practice? Ordinary prisoners who behave well typically see their sentences reduced by roughly one-third—but even this has always been at prison authorities' discretion, not an automatic right. The explicit language in the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance essentially signals that major national security offenders are highly unlikely to receive sentence reductions for early parole.

Lai is already serving time for a separate fraud conviction with 2 years and 3 months remaining. The court ordered that the current sentence essentially adds 18 years to his fraud term. Translation: if his fraud appeal fails, Lai will almost certainly serve the full 20 years. At 78 years old, he'd be 98 when released—meaning he'll very likely spend the rest of his life in prison.

The Cooperators' Calculus

Lai's case involved two groups of serious offenders. One group pleaded guilty and became accomplice witnesses, testifying against Lai. This included Wayland Chan and Li Yu-hin—who had fled Hong Kong but were brought back—as well as former Apple Daily CEO Cheung Kim Hung, former associate publisher Chan Pui-man, and former chief writer Yeung Ching-kee.

Starting from a 15-year baseline, these five ultimately received sentences ranging from 6 years and 3 months to 7 years and 3 months. That represents reductions of 7 years and 9 months to 8 years and 9 months. Five years came off for pleading guilty (the standard one-third reduction), with additional cuts for serving as accomplice witnesses.

The other three former Apple Daily executives—former editor-in-chief Law Wai Kwong, former executive editor-in-chief Lam Man-chung, and former English edition editor-in-chief Fung Wai Kwong—only received the one-third reduction for pleading guilty. Each was sentenced to 10 years.

Early Release on the Horizon

But that's not the full picture. After serving their sentences partially, accomplice witnesses have the opportunity to receive approval from the Correctional Services Department for early parole—potentially cutting another third off their time. In the "NSL 47 subversion case," accomplice witness Chiu Ka-yin received early parole, setting a precedent.

The five accomplice witnesses mentioned above may actually serve just 4-plus to 5-plus years before release. Since they were arrested in June 2021 and have already been detained for 4 years and 8 months, parole could come soon. The math is revealing: the difference between pleading guilty without becoming an accomplice witness versus pleading guilty and cooperating can be more than half your sentence—approximately 5 years. The entire judicial system incentivizes offenders to become accomplice witnesses.

Justice Delivered, Damage Done

Looking back at the entire trial, Hong Kong courts convicted and heavily sentenced the principal offender based on substantial and sufficient evidence. This is what judicial justice looks like. Lai didn't just collude with foreign governments, demanding sanctions against the Central and SAR governments—he actively tried to promote what he called "zhibao" (regime collapse) in China. His intentions were vicious from the start.

But the real damage goes deeper. Lai weaponized his own media outlets to incite subversive thoughts against the government, mobilizing large numbers of young people to take to the streets in 2019. Hundreds of rioters who believed Lai's political propaganda participated in riot after riot, ultimately getting arrested and imprisoned. Large numbers of black-clad rioters also fled overseas to escape prosecution, unable to ever return to Hong Kong.

Lai's poisoning of young minds and the damage he inflicted on Hong Kong society are too numerous to catalog. Twenty years' imprisonment is insufficient to compensate for his crimes.

The West's Selective Outrage

Before and after sentencing, foreign forces have been attacking Hong Kong extensively, with some even claiming they'll "rescue" Jimmy Lai. Make no mistake: Lai was arrested in his own country for violating national security laws and, after a fair trial, was sentenced. This is what the rule of law looks like in action.

Now contrast this with what happened to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who was illegally invaded and arrested by the United States, then taken back to America for trial. That's what a brutal trampling of international law looks like. Western political activists are so interested in rescuing Lai, yet no one's interested in rescuing Maduro. The hypocrisy is stunning.

What kind of logic are these people operating on? The answer is simple: wherever their American masters waves their flags, they follow. Logic doesn't enter the equation.

Lo Wing-hung

Bastille Commentary

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

US President Trump's baffling maneuvers have trapped himself in a chaotic command dilemma in the war against Iran.

Online commentary jokes that Donald Trump follows "The Art of Donald", or say, “The Art of Don’t Know”—" If even I know not my next move, how then could the enemy? "—implying that Trump blindly charges ahead, and naturally the enemy can’t decipher his strategy because he has none at all.

Before launching the conflict with Iran, Trump relied heavily on the United States’ military supremacy—aircraft carriers, stealth fighters, Tomahawk missiles, and the THAAD defense system. He assumed a heavy bombardment campaign would either topple the Iranian regime or force it to surrender.

This single-script scenario repeated everywhere like a formula. When Iran’s actual response deviated from the script, Trump, the director, found himself at a loss and resorted to "The Art of Donald."

First, the bluffing

Just over a week ago, Trump concluded the war was unwinnable and called for peace talks with Iran. On March 30, he posted on his self-founded social media platform Truth Social, claiming serious negotiations with a "new, more rational regime" in Iran had made significant progress.

Yet, Trump simultaneously threatened that if talks failed, the US would utterly destroy all of Iran’s power plants, oil wells, and the oil export hub Kharg Island.

The United States keeps sending more Marine Corps troops to the Middle East as a clear show of force, trying to pressure Iran into talks. The goal is to quickly reach a ceasefire and force acceptance of the so-called "15-point ceasefire plan" pushed by the US, effectively demanding total surrender.

But, if deploying troops were so straightforward, Trump would have already sent forces on the ground. His repeated talk of troop deployments is more bluff than action—he is determined to avoid another Afghanistan-style quagmire. Iran has seen right through these empty threats.

Second, the blown cover 

If Russia’s protracted three-year assault on Ukraine has gradually exposed its limits, the United States blew its cover in just three weeks—both diplomatically and militarily. Trump claimed for over a week that talks with Iran were underway, but Tehran has flatly denied it. On March 31, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Baghaei posted on the X platform, rejecting claims of negotiations. He said, "In the past 31 days, we have had no negotiations with the United States. The US has only transmitted a series of proposals to Iran via intermediaries including Pakistan." Baghaei emphasized that Iran hasn't forgotten past failed talks with the US

Trump has essentially been negotiating with thin air. If forced to choose between the US and Iranian accounts, I’d believe Iran. Genuine talks have not happened. The US has merely relayed peace proposals through third parties, with no real bargaining underway.

The US has also revealed military vulnerabilities. After Iran hit the supposedly invincible F-35 stealth fighter jet, on March 27 Iran attacked the US Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, damaging multiple American aircrafts. A $300 million E-3 Sentry Airborne Early

Warning and Control aircraft was struck by an Iranian missile on the runway as it prepared for takeoff, breaking in two—a first for the E-3 in wartime. This incident reveals serious flaws in the US missile defense system, thus allowing Iran’s destruction of such a vital early-warning aircraft.

Earlier, the US aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford had cited a laundry room fire before withdrawing from the Red Sea combat zone. But on March 17, Trump told the audience at a Saudi investment forum in Miami that the Ford was attacked. He said Iranian missiles struck the carrier from 17 different angles, putting the situation on board in grave danger. Trump's unexpected disclosure casts doubt on the official explanation that a laundry fire prompted the Ford’s exit from the Middle East, suggesting it was in fact hit and caught fire.

The US military’s cover is quickly blown in the US-Iran conflict.

Thirdly, Risks and Opportunities 

Trump’s so-called “Art of Donald” lacks a follow-up plan, leaving a deadlock that stalls any deal with Iran. US officials told The Wall Street Journal, in a report published on March 30, that Trump informed aides he would be willing to halt military operations against Iran even if the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed. Instead, pressure would shift to diplomatic channels to restore free trade flow. Essentially, Trump plans to unilaterally halt hostilities if negotiations with Iran collapse.

With oil prices surging, the whole world must share the burden—Hong Kong included. Yet amid the chaos, Hong Kong finds some opportunities. On March 31, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that three Chinese vessels passed through the Strait of Hormuz, including the Hong Kong-registered container ships CSCL Arctic Ocean and CSCL Indian Ocean, which had been stranded in the Persian Gulf for over a month.

Since late February, this is the first time that China’s large ships have transited the Strait, restoring confidence in the global supply chain. Coordinated by the Chinese government, Hong Kong’s container ships remain among the few commercial vessels able to navigate Hormuz. Amid Middle East turmoil, Hong Kong stands out as an alternative stable choice—and it must seize these opportunities.

Lo Wing-hung