Get you up to speed: Hong Kong court rules Dow Jones tried to stop journalist taking union role
A Hong Kong court found Dow Jones guilty of attempting to deter journalist Selina Cheng from taking a union role but acquitted the company of unlawful dismissal charges. The ruling has raised concerns about media freedom in the city, with sentencing expected at a later date.
Selina Cheng initiated a private prosecution last year for illegal termination after her complaint with the Labour Department did not lead to legal action. Sentencing for Dow Jones is expected to be announced at a later date.
Dow Jones has expressed its disagreement with the court ruling and is currently evaluating its next steps. Sentencing for the case is expected to occur at a later date, with the potential for a fine of up to 100,000 Hong Kong dollars if found guilty of deterring union participation.
What remains unclear — The specific date for the sentencing of Dow Jones has not been announced.
Hong Kong court rules Dow Jones attempted to prevent journalist’s union role
News|Freedom of the PressHong Kong court rules Dow Jones tried to stop journalist taking union role
Court also acquits Dow Jones on the charge of dismissal over Selina Cheng’s leadership role with the Hong Kong Journalists Association.
Published On 10 Sep 202610 Sep 2026
A Hong Kong court has convicted Dow Jones for trying to deter a journalist from taking a union role, but also acquitted the publisher on the charge of dismissal over the role, in a case that raised concerns about media freedom in the city.
Selina Cheng, who was fired by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in July 2024, had accused the newspaper’s publisher Dow Jones of unlawfully terminating her employment over her role chairing the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) and of trying to prevent her from standing for a union position.
The court found the company guilty on Thursday of trying to prevent Cheng’s right to run for the union chairmanship.
However, the judge sided with Dow Jones’ argument that she was made redundant because of corporate restructuring, and not due to her role as HKJA chair.
The right to take part in a trade union is protected by Hong Kong’s labour laws. An employer found guilty on “prevent or deter” charges could be fined up to 100,000 Hong Kong dollars ($12,755).
“If reporters’ employment rights are not sufficiently safeguarded, or when their rights are violated and not enforced in law, then we can no longer work safely as reporters,” Cheng told reporters outside the court after the ruling.
The judge said the company’s requirement that Cheng seek prior permission to take a union role was an “unjustified deterrent” of her rights.
Dow Jones said it disagreed with the ruling and was evaluating next steps.
“The Wall Street Journal has a long and proud history as an employer in Hong Kong. Throughout that time, we have remained deeply respectful of its labour laws and supportive of our employees’ rights, while publishing excellent, impartial journalism about the region,” a spokesperson said.
Sentencing is expected to be handed down at a later date.
Cheng launched a private prosecution last year for illegal termination, after filing a complaint with the Labour Department that did not result in a prosecution.
Founded in 1968, the HKJA is Hong Kong’s longest-established journalists’ organisation and one of the last remaining groups advocating for media rights in the city.
Although Hong Kong was once known for its independent news outlets, media freedom has come under strain and many outlets have disbanded since Beijing imposed a 2020 national security law following sometimes violent pro-democracy protests, according to international rankings and HKJA surveys.
Great article! This really puts things into perspective. I appreciate the thorough research and balanced viewpoint.
Interesting read, though I think there are some points that could have been explored further. Would love to see a follow-up on this topic.
Thanks for sharing this! I had no idea about some of these details. Definitely bookmarking this for future reference.
Well written and informative. The examples provided really help illustrate the main points effectively.
This is exactly what I was looking for! Clear, concise, and very helpful. Keep up the excellent work!