Hong Kong Court: Dow Jones Union Conviction For Deterring Reporter

• A Hong Kong court convicted Dow Jones Publishing Co. (Asia) Inc. for deterring former reporter Selina Cheng from a union leadership role.
• The conviction stemmed from the company's requirement for approval before Cheng ran for election to the Hong Kong Journalists Association, despite the activity being outside working hours.
• Dow Jones was acquitted of a separate charge alleging Cheng's dismissal was due to union activities, with the court citing reasonable doubt.
• The case, initiated by Selina Cheng through a private prosecution under the Hong Kong Employment Ordinance, highlights employer interference in union activities.
• Sentencing for the conviction is pending, and Dow Jones has expressed disagreement with the ruling while evaluating its next steps.

This landmark ruling clarifies that employers in Hong Kong cannot legally require prior approval or consultation from staff before they engage in union activities, even if those activities occur outside working hours.

A Hong Kong court has delivered a significant verdict against Dow Jones Publishing Co. (Asia) Inc., the publisher of The Wall Street Journal, finding it guilty of attempting to deter a former reporter from assuming a leadership position in a local press union. The ruling, handed down on Thursday, September 10, 2026, by Principal Magistrate David Cheung, marks a notable moment for union rights in the territory. However, the company was acquitted of a second charge, which alleged that the reporter's termination was directly linked to her union involvement.

Former Wall Street Journal reporter Selina Cheng, who also chairs the Hong Kong Journalists Association, initiated a private prosecution against Dow Jones after her employment ended in July 2024. The court's decision centered on evidence indicating that Dow Jones had required its approval before Cheng could run for election to the union's leadership. This requirement was deemed an act of deterrence, despite the fact that the election activities themselves did not occur during Cheng's working hours.

The charges against Dow Jones were brought under Hong Kong's Employment Ordinance, with each count carrying a potential maximum fine of 100,000 Hong Kong dollars, equivalent to approximately 12,750 US dollars. The first charge specifically addressed the company's alleged prevention or deterrence of Cheng from exercising her rights to participate in union activities. The second charge contended that her employment was terminated as a direct consequence of her exercising these rights.

During the proceedings, Dow Jones maintained its innocence on both counts. The defense argued that Cheng's termination was due to redundancy, and the magistrate ultimately found sufficient reasonable doubt to acquit the company on this particular charge. However, the court found compelling evidence for the deterrence charge, particularly noting that Cheng's supervisor had previously informed her that her participation in the union election was 'problematic' and would require discussion with management in New York and Dow Jones' in-house lawyers, suggesting her union role would be 'incompatible' with her employment. The magistrate also dismissed the defense's assertion that Cheng's private prosecution constituted an abuse of the criminal process, finding no improper motive behind her actions. Sentencing for the conviction is expected at a later date.

This landmark ruling clarifies that employers in Hong Kong cannot legally require prior approval or consultation from staff before they engage in union activities, even if those activities occur outside working hours. Selina Cheng expressed hope that the case would raise awareness about union suppression in Hong Kong and underscore that employers lack the right to demand consultation from employees regarding their union membership or participation. Dow Jones, for its part, has stated its respectful disagreement with the ruling and is currently evaluating its next steps, emphasizing its long history in Hong Kong as an employer that respects labor laws and supports employee rights.

The case has also reignited concerns regarding media freedom in the Chinese territory, a topic of increasing scrutiny. Hong Kong's standing in the Reporters Without Borders' World Press Freedom Index has significantly declined, falling from 18th out of 139 regions in 2002 to 140th out of 180 countries and territories in its latest assessment. Cheng, a vocal advocate for press freedom, highlighted that the ability of reporters to work without undue worry or stress forms the bedrock of Hong Kong's press freedom. The government has previously voiced criticism of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, adding another layer of complexity to the environment in which such union activities take place. Cheng is now considering an appeal regarding the acquittal on the dismissal charge, a decision that caused alarm among journalists when her employment ended in 2024, particularly given that foreign news outlets have traditionally faced less pressure than their local counterparts.

This case clarifies that Hong Kong employers face legal risks for deterring employees from union participation, even if the activity is outside working hours and doesn't directly lead to dismissal. Compliance officers and legal counsel in Hong Kong should review internal policies to ensure they do not require prior approval or consultation for employees engaging in union activities, aligning with the strict interpretation of the Employment Ordinance.

Source: Original reporting via Associated Press