A Hong Kong journalist is taking on one of the world’s largest media companies in a private criminal prosecution after authorities refused to act. Selina Cheng, chair of the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA), was dismissed from the Wall Street Journal for participating in a trade union election. Forced to pursue justice in her personal capacity, Cheng’s case highlights the challenges faced by journalists defending press freedom and the right to unionise under a shrinking civil society space. The trial pits a single reporter against a global media giant, raising questions about labour rights, freedom of association, and the protection of independent journalism in Hong Kong.
After standing in a union election, Cheng was urged by her employer to withdraw her candidacy, who warned that serving as union chair would be “incompatible” with her role at the newspaper. When she refused to stand down, she was subsequently dismissed under the guise of redundancy. [TM1.1]When Hong Kong’s Labour Department declined to pursue criminal charges, she filed a private prosecution, one of the few legal avenues available to individuals in such circumstances. Private prosecutions are uncommon and can place significant legal and financial burdens on complainants, who must effectively act as prosecutor against defendants with far greater resources.
Labour Department declined to pursue Cheng forced to take action
Cheng argues the case goes beyond personal employment. She says it centres on whether journalists in Hong Kong can participate in trade unions without facing professional retaliation, an issue that intersects with press freedom and freedom of association.
Cheng has been involved with the HKJA since 2021 as an executive committee member. The journalists’ union, founded in 1968, has faced mounting pressure in recent years amid a tightening environment for civil society and independent media. During the 2024 leadership election, then-chair Ronson Chan said he would not seek re-election due to what he described as “force majeure”. Several potential candidates withdrew under pressure, leaving only eight candidates for the executive committee, including Cheng, who was ultimately elected chair.
Speaking to reporters, Cheng acknowledged the pressures on journalists and trade unions but emphasised resilience:
“Although the media and trade unions are facing pressure from many directions, our existence is not defined by that,” she said. “What we are experiencing is not meant to tell people how bleak the situation is, but to show that we can still keep moving forward.”
Just 17 days after taking office — on 17 July 2024 — Cheng was dismissed from the Wall Street Journal. In November 2024, she filed a claim with the Labour Department seeking civil compensation and requesting an investigation. With no prosecution forthcoming, she proceeded with a private criminal case in December.
The case first appeared in court in February 2025 but was adjourned for four months while the Department of Justice considered whether to intervene. Dow Jones’ lawyers later sought further delays on multiple grounds, including requests for clarification from the Department of Justice, consideration of judicial review, and changes to the company’s legal team. The court rejected these requests, and the trial formally began in December 2025. Dow Jones has pleaded not guilty.
Trial Highlights Press Freedom and Union Rights Under Pressure
At the opening hearing, the company’s lawyers sought to halt the proceedings, alleging that Cheng had acted in bad faith by publicly framing the case as a press freedom issue while privately negotiating a settlement with the company. They also claimed that Cheng had not disclosed to the Labour Department or the court that she had warned the company she would pursue a private prosecution if a settlement was not reached — an omission they described as a “lack of candour” creating procedural unfairness.[TM2.1][MI2.2][TM2.3]
Cheng’s legal team countered that any disclosure gaps should be weighed against the public interest, stressing that the case raises critical questions about labour protections and the right of journalists to participate in trade unions without fear of retaliation.
On 9 March, the magistrate rejected Dow Jones’ application to halt the trial and ordered proceedings to continue. Disputes remain over evidence, including whether an audio recording of a conversation between Cheng and her supervisor can be admitted. Dow Jones contends the recording amounts to hearsay and that the supervisor lacked decision-making authority. Cheng’s lawyers argue the supervisor’s repeated use of “we” indicates his statements reflected the position of both the Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones.
Observers note that the case highlights the difficulties faced by individuals seeking accountability from powerful corporations in Hong Kong. Beyond Cheng’s personal claims, the trial raises broader issues about freedom of association, labour organising, and the environment for independent journalism in the city.