The West Kowloon Law Courts Building where the High Court process the conviction of Jimmy Lai on December 15, 2025. Photo: IC

Several Hong Kong lawyer associations have expressed concerns on Tuesday over some media reports and comments on the conviction of Jimmy Lai case, urging the public to fully understand and carefully read the reasoning behind the judgment and emphasizing their unquestionable trust and confidence in Hong Kong's judicial system, the independence of the judiciary, and the integrity and professionalism of the judges.

The Law Society of Hong Kong expresses its deepest regret over certain media reports describing the trial and conviction as a "sham trial," and the Society encourages all members of the community to carefully review and fully understand the contents of the Reasons for Verdict, according to a statement the Society sent to the Global Times on Tuesday. 

The trial was conducted in open court over 156 days and all parties had legal representation throughout the proceedings, the Society said, noting that during the course of the trial, none of the parties' legal representatives raised any allegation of unfair treatment.

The fair ruling of the Hong Kong courts has demonstrated the dignity of the rule of law, winning widespread support from all sectors of Hong Kong society and applause from citizens. The interference from external forces in the Hong Kong judiciary's independent exercise of its judicial power in the Jimmy Lai case, is not only factually inaccurate, but also unpopular and will ultimately prove futile, the Hong Kong Legal Exchange Foundation said in a statement sent to the Global Times on Tuesday.

The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR)'s High Court on Monday morning found Jimmy Lai, an instigator of anti-China riots in Hong Kong, guilty on two charges of conspiring to collude with external forces and a charge of conspiracy to publish seditious materials. 

Multiple central government departments of China voiced their support on Monday for the verdict.

As this case is the first ruling under the National Security Law for Hong Kong concerning the offense of conspiring to collude with foreign or external forces to endanger national security, the Hong Kong Bar Association said, believing that the case is of great significance for the unique legal development of Hong Kong under "One Country, Two systems," RTHK reported. 

The association said that most of the criminal proceedings in this case were conducted through public hearings, with the process being completely transparent, and it is confident that Hong Kong's legal community will continue to operate independently and remain politically neutral, free from any external influence or interference.

The association also urged the public to carefully read the judgment's reasoning and to respect Hong Kong's judicial procedures, according to RTHK.