G7 condemns Hong Kong Jimmy Lai verdict; release urged
Seven foreign ministers and the EU’s top diplomat have condemned the prosecution of Hong Kong publisher Jimmy Lai under the National Security Law, following a guilty verdict on 15 December 2025. The joint G7 statement, published by the UK Government on 17 December, also calls for Lai’s immediate release and points to freedoms of expression and the press set out in Hong Kong’s Basic Law.
If you’re reading this in class, focus on the verbs. When diplomats say they “condemn” and “call on” a government to act, that’s firm language. It does not carry legal force, but it signals political pressure and frames how other governments, businesses and the public discuss the case.
Jimmy Lai, founder of Apple Daily and a long‑standing pro‑democracy figure, was found guilty in Hong Kong’s High Court under security and sedition provisions on 15 December 2025. He now faces a potentially lengthy sentence under the security regime.
Quick explainer: the National Security Law was introduced by Beijing in 2020 after the city’s mass protests. It created new national security offences and allows very severe penalties, including life imprisonment in the gravest cases. Officials say it ensures stability; critics argue it chills dissent and curbs press freedom.
Quick explainer: the Basic Law is Hong Kong’s mini‑constitution under “one country, two systems”. Article 27 protects freedom of speech, the press and publication, and the freedoms of assembly and association. Those are the rights the G7 statement highlights.
Since 2024, Hong Kong has also enacted a local security law under Article 23 that broadens offences such as treason and sedition and lengthens detention before charge. Supporters say it plugs gaps left by the 2020 law; rights groups warn it further contracts civic space.
Who is speaking here matters. Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the US-joined by the EU’s High Representative-issued this message together. When the G7 speaks in step, it raises the diplomatic cost of ignoring the issue and sets a shared reference point for any follow‑up.
What the statement does-and doesn’t-do. It cannot overturn a court decision. It can shape the international conversation, appear in parliamentary debates or diplomatic meetings, and give us a clear text we can read critically against Hong Kong’s stated legal protections.
What to watch next. Sentencing is due in January 2026, with legal arguments expected before any final term is announced. Appeals remain possible. We’ll also watch for any formal response from Hong Kong authorities to the G7 call.
Learning note. Try this in class: take the G7 text and highlight every reference to rights and every action verb. Then read Article 27 of the Basic Law and write one paragraph comparing the two. This helps us test claims against written law and practise careful, source‑based reading.