Hong Kong court convicts Wall Street Journal publisher of deterring reporter from union role

A Hong Kong court has convicted Dow Jones Publishing, the parent company of the Wall Street Journal, for its actions regarding a former reporter’s involvement in a trade union. Principal magistrate David Cheung ruled that the company was guilty of preventing or deterring an employee from exercising trade union rights. However, the court acquitted the publisher of the separate charge of dismissing or discriminating against the employee specifically because she exercised those rights.

The case centered on the employment of Selina Cheng, who covered China’s automobile and energy sectors for the newspaper. In 2024, Cheng was appointed as the chair of the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA). Shortly after taking on this role, she was dismissed from her position at the newspaper. While the company stated that the termination was the result of a restructuring process, the legal proceedings examined the events leading up to her departure.

Cheng alleged that her editors had pressured her to withdraw from her union activities. According to her testimony, she was told that employees should not be seen as advocates for press freedom in Hong Kong, as such involvement could be perceived as a conflict of interest. She further claimed that the company requested she seek formal approval for outside activities and specifically asked her to step down from her board position at the association.

Following her dismissal in July 2024, Cheng initiated a private prosecution against the publisher. The case has drawn attention due to its implications for labor rights and the broader climate for press freedom in the city.

The ruling distinguishes between the company's efforts to influence the reporter's participation in the union and the legal justification for her subsequent termination. While the court found the publisher liable for deterring the employee from her union role, it did not find sufficient evidence to conclude that the dismissal itself was a direct act of discrimination based on her union membership.