The Verdict in Jimmy Lai's National Security Trial

Hong Kong's High Court has sentenced media tycoon Jimmy Lai to 20 years in prison on charges of colluding with foreign forces and sedition under the city's National Security Law (NSL), marking one of the harshest penalties issued under this Beijing-imposed legislation. This development, unfolding on February 9, 2026, concludes a protracted legal battle that began years ago and has drawn global scrutiny. Lai, the 78-year-old founder of the now-defunct pro-democracy tabloid Apple Daily, was accused of using his media platform to incite hatred against the government and seek foreign intervention in Hong Kong affairs. The case exemplifies the broadening application of the NSL, enacted in 2020 amid widespread pro-democracy protests, which criminalizes acts of secession, subversion, terrorism, and collusion with external forces.

The sentencing has ignited debates beyond politics, particularly within higher education circles, where fears of similar repercussions for publishing critical research on China or Hong Kong governance are mounting. For researchers worldwide, including those in Brazil with growing academic ties to Chinese institutions, this raises alarms about the future of open scholarly discourse and research publications on sensitive geopolitical topics.

Jimmy Lai's Journey: From Rags to Media Empire and Imprisonment

Born in mainland China, Jimmy Lai escaped communist rule at age 12, arriving in Hong Kong via a fishing boat. He built a fortune in the garment industry before pivoting to media, launching Apple Daily in 1995. The paper became a bestseller with its sensationalist style and unapologetic criticism of Beijing, boasting circulation peaks of over 500,000 copies daily. Lai's outspoken Catholicism and advocacy for democracy positioned him as a symbol of resistance.

Arrested in 2020 shortly after the NSL's imposition, Lai faced multiple charges. Prior convictions included fraud and unauthorized assembly, but the flagship national security case centered on allegations that he conspired with foreign entities through editorials and interviews. Prosecutors presented evidence from seized Apple Daily materials, arguing they amounted to calls for sanctions against China. Lai's defense maintained this was protected journalistic expression under Hong Kong's Basic Law, which guarantees press freedom.

Unpacking the Charges and Trial Process

The trial, lasting over 150 days, was held without a jury—a departure from common law tradition—using judges handpicked by authorities. Charges included one count of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces, carrying up to life imprisonment, and two sedition counts. Evidence included Lai's meetings with U.S. officials like Mike Pompeo and articles published post-NSL. The prosecution framed these as deliberate subversion, while supporters decried it as retaliation for dissent.

Judge Esther Toh described Lai's actions as a "well-organized scheme," justifying the severe sentence despite his age and health concerns. This ruling aligns with Beijing's narrative of restoring stability but has been lambasted internationally as a blow to freedoms enshrined in the 1997 Sino-British handover agreement.

Global and Academic Reactions to the Sentencing

Reactions poured in swiftly. The U.S. State Department condemned it as "politically motivated," the UK summoned Chinese diplomats, and Amnesty International called it a "cold-blooded attack on expression." In academia, groups like Scholars at Risk highlighted parallels to eroding freedoms in higher education. While no major Brazilian governmental statement emerged immediately, Latin American human rights networks expressed solidarity, linking it to broader concerns over authoritarian overreach.

Human Rights Watch's report on Hong Kong academia underscores the chilling atmosphere, with Lai's case amplifying fears.

NSL's Creeping Influence on Hong Kong Universities

Since 2020, the NSL has transformed Hong Kong's eight publicly funded universities, once global hubs for free inquiry. University leaders have pledged allegiance to the law, leading to self-censorship. Examples include the removal of Tiananmen Square memorials at the University of Hong Kong and Chinese University of Hong Kong, and disbandment of student unions for "national security risks."

• Over 100 academics have emigrated since 2020, citing fears of prosecution.
• Student publications face preemptive reviews; "Democracy Walls" have been censored or dismantled.
• Course syllabi on politics and history are being revised to avoid "sensitive" content.

This environment directly hampers research publications, as faculty avoid topics like democracy movements or human rights to safeguard careers and funding.

Self-Censorship: A Silent Killer of Research Output

Self-censorship pervades Hong Kong academia, with surveys showing 70% of faculty altering research or teaching to comply with perceived red lines. Publications on China-related social sciences have declined sharply; for instance, a 2024 analysis noted a 40% drop in critical political science papers from HK authors in international journals. Processes now involve internal vetting before submission, delaying or derailing work.

Step-by-step, this manifests as: 1) Topic selection shying from controversy; 2) Data collection avoiding dissident sources; 3) Peer review hesitancy; 4) Post-publication pressures leading to retractions.

Statistics Highlighting Decline in HK Research Vitality

Quantitative data paints a stark picture. HK universities' global rankings have slipped—HKU from 26th to 35th in QS 2026—partly due to reduced international collaborations amid freedom concerns. Research output in humanities and social sciences fell 25% post-NSL, per Scopus data. Turnover rates exceed 15% annually, higher than pre-2020 averages. Expatriate faculty departures, once 5%, now hit 20%.

Transnational Censorship: Risks for Global Scholars

China's influence extends beyond borders, pressuring foreign universities via Confucius Institutes and funding ties. Over 3,000 European-China collaborations involved military-linked institutions, raising dual-use concerns. Publishers like Cambridge University Press have censored articles in China at government behest. For researchers, publishing critical work risks visa denials or collaboration halts.

BBC coverage of the sentencing notes growing wariness among international academics.

Brazil's Academic Ties with China: Emerging Vulnerabilities

Brazil boasts robust university partnerships with China, including 25+ Confucius Institutes across Latin America, facilitating exchanges for thousands of students annually. Institutions like USP and Unicamp host joint programs in agronomy, engineering, and Mandarin studies. However, amid Beijing's global censorship push, Brazilian researchers studying Chinese politics or human rights face dilemmas.

During Brazil's recent political shifts, academic freedom debates echoed HK issues, with funding cuts to social sciences. Lai's case serves as a cautionary tale: Brazilian scholars publishing on Xinjiang, Taiwan, or HK could encounter backlash in joint projects.

Stakeholder Perspectives: Voices from Academia

• HK Professors: "We self-edit manuscripts to avoid trouble."
• Brazilian Researchers: "China funding is tempting, but at what cost to integrity?"
• Students: Fear reprisals for activism or critical theses.
• Admins: Balancing patriotism with global reputation.

Experts advocate transparency in collaborations. For career stability, explore higher ed jobs in freer environments.

Strategies to Safeguard Research Publications

To counter threats:

1. Diversify funding and partners beyond China.
2. Use anonymous preprints on arXiv or Zenodo.
3. Support orgs like Scholars at Risk.
4. Leverage higher ed career advice for resilient paths.

Brazilian unis can audit Confucius Institutes for autonomy clauses.

Future Outlook: Can Academic Freedom Endure?

Lai's 20-year term likely solidifies NSL's permanence, potentially stifling HK's research edge. Globally, expect heightened scrutiny of China ties. For Brazilian higher ed, proactive policies could preserve open inquiry. Researchers eyeing stability might consider university jobs, faculty positions, or rate my professor for informed choices. Ultimately, Lai's legacy may inspire a global pushback for unfettered publication.

Engage with higher ed jobs, career advice, and professor ratings to navigate these challenges.

Photo by Amanda Jones on Unsplash