Nepalese Students Visit Hong Kong to Discuss Impact of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) - LegCo Members and Nepalese Consul-General Share Insights

Author: Member of the Legislative Council, Dr. Lee Hoey Simon

Under the joint initiative of Legislative Council Members Hon Maggie Chan Man-ki, Dr Hon Thomas So Shiu-tsung, Hon Wu Yingpeng, Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee, law students from Kathmandu University and Tribhuvan University in Nepal recently came to Hong Kong to participate in the annual International Commercial Arbitration Moot Court Competition, and jointly organized the "A Young Chat of the Rule of Law and Social Development of Nepel since the BRI". Dr Bindeswar Prasad Lekhak, Consul-General of Nepal to HKSAR, attended the seminar. The event was supported by Regal Hotels Group, China Resources Group, Tseng Hin Pei Charity Fund Limited, and Basic Law Foundation, among other organizations.

This marks the fourth consecutive year that Legislative Council Member Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee has gathered with young law students from BRI country in Hong Kong. This year, for the first time, the exchange was jointly organized with multiple Legislative Council Members, and for the first time, the Nepalese Consul-General in Hong Kong attended.

In his opening remarks, Dr Lekhak, Consul-General of Nepal to HKSAR, emphasized the long-standing and robust friendship between Nepal and China, reaffirming Nepal's steadfast commitment in upholding the one-China principle. Dr Lekhak pointed out that China is Nepal's second-largest trading partner, with close ties spanning trade, foreign direct investment, and tourism. Since Nepal participated in the BRI in 2017, collaborative projects have expanded across various sectors—including urban development, infrastructure, education, health, sports, and energy—providing significant opportunities for Nepal’s development. Nepal has a favorable investment environment and welcomes all sectors in Hong Kong to further strengthen economic and trade cooperation with Nepal.

During the seminar, the Nepalese law students shared profound insights into the positive changes the BRI has brought to their region, specifically discussing its tangible impact on improving local livelihoods and advancing the rule of law. They pointed out that during the pandemic, the BRI framework facilitated vaccine and medical assistance to Nepal, playing a significant role in humanitarian relief. In the long term, they have a positive vision for the BRI’s promotion of cross-border connectivity, bringing medical services, economic opportunities, trade efficiency, and cultural preservation to benefit local communities.

Local Hong Kong young leaders also participated in the exchange, engaging in in-depth discussions on how the BRI promotes the rule of law in Nepal, with particular focus on the critical role of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as mediation and arbitration, in promoting regional legal cooperation. This exchange fostered mutual learning and deepened understanding and recognition, served as a vital communication bridge for young leaders from different cultural backgrounds.

To showcase their heritage, the Nepalese students presented traditional souvenirs, including Dhaka topi, handmade yak milk soaps, and traditional instruments singing bowls. The venue was also decorated with BRI-themed exhibition installations, enable attendees to experience the cultural charm of Nepal firsthand and further strengthening their friendship.

Legislative Councillor Dr Simon Lee and Consul-General Dr Lekhak (left) exchanged views at the Hong Kong Legislative Council

Legislative Councillor Dr Simon Lee and Consul-General Dr Lekhak (front row right) exchanged views with law students from two Nepalese universities at the Hong Kong Legislative Council

Councillor Dr Simon Lee presents Legislative Council souvenirs prepared for Consul-General Dr Lekhak (second from right)

China Resources Group Senior Group Legal Counsel Johnny Ip Chun-yuen (fifth from left), Tseng Hin Pei Charity Fund Limited Representative Riley Tseng Fanwei (sixth from left), Legislative Council Member Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee, Consul-General of Nepal to HKSAR Dr Bindeswar Prasad Lekhak (eight from left), Legislative Council Member Hon Maggie Chan Man-ki, Member of the Guangzhou Municipal Committee of the CPPCC and Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area International Maritime and Commercial Mediation Center Tan Guojian (tenth from left), pose for a group photo with law students from two Nepalese universities at the Hong Kong LegCo

Tseng Hin Pei Charity Fund Limited Representative Riley Tseng Fanwei (first from left), Legislative Council Member Hon Maggie Chan Man-ki, Consul-General of Nepal to HKSAR Dr Bindeswar Prasad Lekhak (third from left), Legislative Council Member Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee, China Resources Group Senior Group Legal Counsel Johnny Ip Chun-yuen (fifth from left) pose for a group photo wearing traditional Nepalese Dhaka topi

Kathmandu University law student representatives deliver presentation

Tribhuvan University law student representatives deliver presentation

Tribhuvan University law student representative assists Legislative Council Member Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee to wear the traditional Nepalese Dhaka topi

Tribhuvan University law student representatives present souvenirs to Legislative Council Member Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee

Legislative Council Members Dr Hon Thomas So Shiu-tsung, Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee, Hon Wu Yingpeng pose for a group photo wearing traditional Nepalese Dhaka topi

Legislative Council Members Dr Hon Hoey Simon Lee, Hon Wu Yingpeng, Dr Hon Thomas So Shiu-tsung pose for a group photo with law students from two Nepalese universities wearing traditional Nepalese Dhaka topi

InsightSpeak

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

Ng Hiuying

The conviction and sentencing of Jimmy Lai Chee-ying for conspiring to collude with foreign forces under Hong Kong’s National Security Law has drawn sustained international attention. Much of that attention has focused on Lai himself and on Apple Daily, the now-defunct newspaper he founded. Far less scrutiny, however, has been directed at the role of another media institution that has followed the case with striking persistence: The Wall Street Journal.

A review of the Journal’s coverage over the past year shows dozens of articles related to Lai, a substantial proportion of which are editorials or opinion pieces rather than straight news reporting. In both volume and continuity, this level of engagement exceeds that of most other major Western media outlets. The question, therefore, is not whether the case is newsworthy, but why this particular newspaper appears so invested in it.

The reasons become clearer when one examines the factual findings set out in the trial judgment.

An Unusually Dense Web of Personal Connections

In the court’s Reasons for Verdict, a document running to more than 800 pages, the term “Wall Street Journal” appears over 40 times. More importantly, Lai himself admitted in evidence that he had been “very close” to the Wall Street Journal people.

The judgment establishes that several key intermediaries who facilitated Lai’s contacts with senior US officials had professional ties to the Wall Street Journal. Mary Kissel and Matt Pottinger, both former editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal, later entered the highest levels of the US policy apparatus. In 2019, Kissel served as an aide to then Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, while Pottinger was the Principal Deputy National Security Advisor. Another figure, David Feith —the Wall Street Journal’s former employee who later worked at the US State Department — was found to have conveyed advance information to Lai’s aide regarding Washington’s intention to revoke Hong Kong’s special status.

These connections were not incidental. They functioned as channels through which Lai gained access to figures such as Pompeo, Vice President Mike Pence, and other senior policymakers. In this sense, a shared professional background in the Journal’s opinion pages formed part of what might be described as the “lubricant” of Lai’s foreign lobbying activities.

The Journal as a Platform for Strategic Messaging

The judgment further records that in June 2019, former US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz suggested that Lai publish articles in major Western outlets, including The Wall Street Journal, to draw the attention of the White House to Hong Kong issues.

Crucially, the drafting of one such article was guided by Bill McGurn, Lai’s godfather and a member of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, who had previously served as President George W. Bush’s chief speechwriter. In an August 2019 draft sent by Lai to McGurn, Lai argued that the United States “must confront China, not appease it,” and urged measures including visa sanctions on Chinese and Hong Kong officials’ families, international condemnation of China’s religious persecution, and the establishment of a congressional panel to “monitor Beijing’s adherence to Hong Kong’s basic law”.

This article, the court found, set the tone for Lai’s subsequent public messaging — in newspaper columns, social media posts, and online broadcasts. It functioned as a kind of manifesto. Subsequent events confirmed its impact: Lai was informed on 25 February 2020 that his Wall Street Journal article published days earlier, “China’s Facade of Stability,” had been well received by Pence and his senior aides, who were anxious to see Lai when here, and discuss, among other things, Hong Kong’s forthcoming election.

If Apple Daily served as Lai’s domestic platform, the Wall Street Journal operated as his principal international outlet — an external-facing channel aimed at Western governments and audiences. This division of labour, as the evidence suggests, was strategic rather than accidental.

After Arrest: From Reporting to Advocacy

Following Lai’s arrest and subsequent conviction, the Wall Street Journal adopted an overtly supportive editorial posture. Beyond reporting on procedural developments, it repeatedly issued editorials and opinion columns passing value judgments on Hong Kong’s judiciary and on the case itself.

These pieces rarely engaged with the detailed factual findings of the court. Instead, they tended to subsume the criminal proceedings into a broader narrative of “political persecution”, “press freedom”, and “human rights crisis”. One editorial notoriously characterised Lai’s 20-year sentence as a “death sentence”, while others employed terms such as “China abuse Jimmy Lai” and “the Communists torture Jimmy Lai” to describe the legal process.

Given McGurn’s senior role within the Journal and his personal relationship with Lai, it is not unreasonable to infer that many of these editorials were shaped, if not authored, by him. Whatever the case, the tone and framing of the coverage suggest something closer to an advocacy campaign than detached commentary. The invocation of press freedom appears less an abstract defence of principle than an effort to rally support around a long-cultivated political ally.

Understanding the Pattern

Seen in this light, the Wall Street Journal’s intense focus on the Lai case is not simply a matter of journalistic zeal or the defence of universal values. It reflects a convergence of personal networks, long-standing ideological alignment, and concrete political interests — all documented, in substantial part, in the court’s findings.

This context helps explain why the Journal has continued to publish commentary critical of the Hong Kong courts despite repeated official rebuttals from the Hong Kong Government and the Commissioner’s Office of China’s Foreign Ministry in the Hong Kong SAR. For readers, recognizing this background does not require agreement with the verdict. It does, however, suggest the need for caution.

To read the Journal’s editorials on the Lai case without reference to these entanglements is to risk mistaking advocacy for analysis. A more informed assessment requires looking beyond the rhetoric of freedom and examining the specific relationships and actions that the court found, on the evidence, to constitute collusion.

Only then can the debate proceed on a clearer factual footing.