Former HKJA Chairman Cliff Bale suddenly withdrew from seconding Sherry Lee after hearing rumours, uncovering the mystery of Mary Ann Benitez’s withdrawal of nomination
Press Release
8 August 2024
True Report issued three press releases in a row in June, revealing that the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) was suspected of “election rigging” and obstructed veteran journalist and editor-in-chief Sherry Lee from running for the chairmanship of the HKJA in the election of 2024-25 Executive Committee. Lee encountered many “man-made” difficulties and obstacles in the process of qualifying as a member and obtaining nomination. Ultimately, the HKJA unilaterally claimed that Lee’s nominator had withdrawn their nomination and revoked her right to participate in the election. Ronson Chan Ron-sing, the previous chairman of the HKJA, informed the media that Sherry Lee could complain to its “Election Committee” which he claimed was “independent of the Executive Committee of the HKJA”. Lee then sent three separate emails to the HKJA on June 7, 9 and 10 to make a series of complaints regarding the matter.
The HKJA finally emailed Sherry Lee the findings of the “Election Committee” (see attachment) on June 30 and published it onto the HKJA’s Facebook page. In the investigation results, the HKJA completely failed to respond to the various questions raised by the press releases in the newspaper True Report and Sherry Lee’s complaint letter. It not only avoided addressing the main accusations, but further deflected the focus through misleading people by providing their insignificant explanations. To restore the truth, we conducted an investigation, and we are now publishing a four-part series of press releases to expose the inaccuracy and unfairness surrounding HKJA’s investigative report that conceals the HKJA’s “election rigging” scandal.
This is the third episode.
In the first episode, we revealed that the members of the Election Committee responsible for conducting the so-called independent investigation turned out to be friends with the then chairman Ronson Chan Ron-sing. One of them was even believed to be Chan’s best friend, reflecting that it was a “Friends Investigate Friends” investigation, which seriously lacked independence and impartiality. This certainly makes people suspect that the purpose behind the investigation is to hide the scandal of the HKJA’s “election rigging”! We have also disclosed the identity of Mr. S, a HKJA retired member who is suspected of assisting the HKJA in blocking Lee’s candidacy. This person is Stanley Leung, previously the Executive Editor-in-Chief of Metropolis Daily《都市日報》.
In the second episode, we exposed the various suspicions about the Election Committee’s investigation report point by point, and explained how their investigation avoided questions and distorted facts. The HKJA failed to explain why Lee was only notified on the deadline (to become a member for eligibility to stand for election) that the membership of her referee Ms. E had expired, thus making her membership invalid. The office also pretended to be unstaffed on the deadline for nomination, with the intention of preventing Lee from submitting her nomination. Additionally, we also disclosed the identity of Ms. E, the news editor of the South China Morning Post who allegedly assisted the HKJA in preventing Lee from joining the association by blocking her eligibility for election. This individual is Emily Tsang, and her Chinese name is 曾愛盈.
In this episode, we will publish a private email obtained earlier, sent by Cliff Bale, the former chairman and life member of the HKJA and former veteran reporter of Radio Television Hong Kong. The content of the email not only revealed that someone was spreading rumours to make him withdraw his offer to become Lee’s seconder, but simultaneously revealed that “The Standard” reporter Mary Ann Benitez had canceled her nomination for Lee for the same reasons, which ultimately led to Lee being disqualified from election. According to our analysis, there is a high chance that the then former senior officials of the HKJA were the exact individuals spreading the rumours. However, the HKJA’s investigation report did not check with Benitez, the core figure of the incident on whether she was instigated, hence the report is suspected of covering up the truth and full picture.
The HKJA is supposed to be a fair and just organization that monitors society. If they violate the core value of justice, the media industry and the public have the right to know. For the sake of public interest and as the media, we have the responsibility to disclose any evidence, including this email, to expose the HKJA’s suspected election manipulation, for the public not to be misled by the HKJA on different issues in the future.
HKJA chairman and life member Cliff Bale suddenly withdrew seconding Lee, an act that confused the referee
In the early morning of May 24, Sherry Lee remembered that her former colleague, British journalist Donald Gasper, had been an executive member of the HKJA, and so she contacted him and asked him if he was an HKJA member, then sent him her election platform information. Gasper quickly confirmed that he was a member of the HKJA. Lee asked him if he could be her candidacy seconder, and he readily agreed which is due to Gasper’s trust in Sherry Lee. He has worked with Sherry Lee for a long time at “The Standard” and the “South China Morning Post” and is familiar with Sherry Lee’s reports. Gasper is familiar with Sherry Lee’s sincerity to help the society, and has introduced people in need of help to Sherry Lee. In the end, Gasper found out that his membership had long expired and he could not be her seconder.
From Lee’s election platform and message, Gasper learned that Lee hopes to run for office to improve the quality of Hong Kong’s media and enhance press freedom, for the purpose of re-establishing the fourth power to improve Hong Kong’s governance and peoples’ livelihood. Therefore, he is willing to help Lee find other HKJA members to be her seconder. At about 9 pm on May 24, Gasper informed Sherry Lee through his contact about his old friend —- HKJA former chairman and life member, and retired senior reporter of Radio Television Hong Kong Cliff Bale, who agreed to become Sherry Lee’s seconder, with Bale providing his membership number to Gasper to be forwarded to Lee for the purpose of filling in as the seconder in the nomination form. (Gasper’s messages are shown below.）
Sherry Lee was very pleased to learn the news. She further asked Gasper whether Bale could second Mary Ann Benitez to run for the position of vice chairperson, with Lee complimenting Benitez as a responsible reporter (this was based on Lee’s previous understanding of her). Lee pointed out that if Benitez is unable to be elected, it would be difficult for her to make changes on the Executive Committee of the HKJA alone.
Lee immediately sent an email to Cliff Bale at 2:10 a.m. on May 25, hoping to obtain his signature on the nomination form, but strangely he did not respond. Only until 4:20 pm on the same day, Cliff finally replied, saying, “Thank you for your email. However, I have had second thoughts about seconding you. I believe it is better for you to secure a seconder who is a working journalist living in Hong Kong. Although I am a life HKJA member, I no longer work in journalism and currently live in the Philippines.” （See Picture below)
Sherry Lee told Gasper about Bale’s sudden refusal to second her and tried to know the reason behind. Gasper was similarly puzzled and said, “Sherry, I am puzzled and disappointed by Cliff and will try to get him to change his mind. I find the reason for his backtracking unconvincing and wonder what is really behind this.” （See Picture below) Gasper said he would send an email to Bale that night, asking him to reconsider seconding Sherry Lee’s candidacy, but the other party had never responded.
On June 29, Cliff Bale exposed the mystery of his withdrawal from seconding Lee and of Benitez’s retreat of her nomination!
Finally, at 1:23 a.m. on July 1, Gasper sent a message to Sherry Lee, saying that Bale had replied to him. It turned out that at 7 a.m. on June 29, Bale responded to Gasper via email, stating the reason for not seconding Sherry Lee:
“Hi Don, I owe you a proper explanation about why I didn’t nominate Sherry Lee. I sought comment from a journalist friend about Sherry. This friend said Sherry runs an online publication called True Report. It appears this publication is very pro- government, pro-police and pro- National Security Law. Not a position the HKJA should align itself with. Sherry sent me her election manifesto, which did not mention her involvement with True Report. So that casts serious doubt on her honesty and credibility. I should add that Mary Ann withdrew her nomination of Sherry upon learning of all this.” (See pictures below)
Mary Ann Benitez never informed Sherry Lee of the withdrawal of her nomination, and the HKJA’s claim that Benitez had taken the initiative to withdraw her nomination has remained a mystery. If she did withdraw her nomination, why? Bale’s email has solved the mystery, and it is alleged that the core figures in the HKJA are the ones who spread the rumours.
Why did this inference happen? If someone successfully persuaded Benitez to withdraw her nomination, both parties must want to keep it a secret to prevent others from finding out that the withdrawal of the nomination was due to someone’s instigation behind the scenes. They would not tell others about the suspected “election rigging” behavior. Therefore, apart from Benitez and the HKJA, no one else would know the details or reason behind Benitez’s withdrawal of nomination.
Bale’s reply already stated that it was not Benitez who told him, but a “friend”, so there is a high chance that this person was from the HKJA. It is logical that the person who talked to Bale was the same as Benitez’s, in which Benitez had received the same information that led her to withdraw her nomination. This had already indicated that this person was the former or a senior executive of the HKJA, because no one except the senior executives would know about it. We believe that after receiving Bale’s inquiry about Lee, the senior management spread the rumour to him in order to prevent Bale from seconding Sherry Lee for her successful run for the election. This is simply election manipulation.
The content in Bale’s email is filled with false accusations, covering four aspects:
1) True Report supports the government.
2) True Report supports the police.
3) True Report supports the national security law.
4) Sherry Lee’s platform does not mention her relationship with True Report and lacks integrity.
Let’s rebut these claims point by point!
1) Regarding the rumours about how we support the government. Anyone who reads the content on the True Report website will know very well that we are an impartial media. Our goal in running the newspaper is to promote “fair and impartial” journalism in Hong Kong and practice it through our media. Our criticism of the government’s policies is critical and our media is filled with outspoken reports. We criticized the Legislative Council for having only pro-establishment legislators, and on the new electoral system for district councils for destroying diverse voices. We also blamed the current government for weakening the “One country, two systems”, exposed the political mission of the Care Team and the collusion between government and businessmen involved in Tai Hang Sai Estate. Because True Report is a media that is critical and has sharp opinions, many people have even misunderstood us as an “anti-government” media. Then how can we be a media that blindly supports the government?
2) Regarding accusations of us supporting the police, a piece of evidence against this is a YouTube video we recently published, which recorded a team of Sham Shui Po detectives arresting a resident of Tai Hang Sai Estate. In the video, we questioned the law enforcement behavior of the police officers suspected of abusing police power. More than 200,000 people watched the video, and nearly 1,000 people left messages. Most of them criticized the police force. How can we be a media that supports the police?
3) Regarding the accusations of us supporting the National Security Law, a clarification for this is extremely important. When Hong Kong was plundered by violent demonstrations in 2019, Hong Kong needed the national security law. Just as the UK faces new national security threats, it similarly enacted the “National Security Act 2023” last year to protect national security. Therefore, what is the crime of enacting the Hong Kong National Security Law? However, our support for the enactment of the national security law does not equate to the misconception that we support the abuse of power by officials and law enforcement personnel.
If the national security law of any country is abused by those in power to arrest, charge and imprison people at will, it would become a bad law and infringe on human rights and freedoms. We have published many articles criticizing incidents involving the abuse of national security laws, including editorials “Let the National Security Law defend itself, and justice will be demonstrated!” and “The NPC Interpretation of the Law on what Hong Kong People See and Think”, and reprinted a famous article by mainland journalist Jing Haihou, titled “What kind of Hong Kong do we need?”, that had reflected the problem and effects of Hong Kong officials’ repeated abuse of the national security law.
To put it simply, the existence of a national security law in a place is not a problem, but the abuse of the national security law is the problem. Hong Kong should not avoid the legislation for the prevention of damage and abuse. However, because the National Security Law has been heavily demonized, Cliff Bale has been affected and lacks a comprehensive understanding of the issue. From Bale’s response to Gasper’s email, Bale, like many, adopts a one-size-fits-all attitude towards the national security law and those that support it. The “friend” who spread rumours to him aimed to demonize Sherry Lee taking advantage of society’s lack of understanding regarding the national security issues. These rumours also explain why Mary Ann Benitez canceled the nomination of Lee (allegedly according to the HKJA), and why the retired member Stanley Leung, who through Benitez provided his consent to second Lee’s candidacy, who abruptly called himself “a member of the election committee, therefore, must remain neutral” and refused to become a seconder for Lee’s candidacy.
4) Regarding Bale’s accusation of Sherry Lee’s unmentioned relationship with True Report in her election platform, and questions about her honesty, Sherry Lee’s founding of True Report cannot and was not concealed at all. That is because once Lee runs for election, people search her name on the Internet and would know that she is the editor-in-chief of True Report. Furthermore, if Lee wanted to conceal her connection with True Report, she would not have stated clearly that she founded True Report/is the editor of True Report in the Chinese bio of the election platform that she sent to media friends, including an RTHK reporter and a former Now TV reporter, during the time Lee sought for nominations in May.
In “Sherry Lee’s bio”, which Lee sent to South China Morning Post news editor Emily Tsang on May 16, it writes, “To this day, Sherry’s fiery enthusiasm for media work has only grown to become stronger than ever. In 2019, she witnessed how under the media’s brainwashing, Hong Kongers were completely torn apart, and that the society has sunk to the bottom. She suddenly felt that she had a ‘responsibility’ and hoped to use her talents and abilities gifted by God and went ahead to found True Report to play her part to rebuild Hong Kong.” Sherry Lee also sent her election platform to Mary Ann Benitez, and in the Chinese bio of the election platform (because the translation for the English version was not ready at the time) Lee pointed out that she was the editor of True Report. Tsang and Benitez cannot deny this because this information had been documented through the phone messages. Therefore, when Sherry Lee was seeking nomination, she stated in her election platform that she was the founder of True Report, and hence how could Lee hide it anyway?
During Lee’s search for nomination, Sherry Lee realized that after the large-scale demonstrations in 2019, the Hong Kong society had already been completely torn apart and polarized, divided mainly into two camps: pro-China and anti-China. Many workers within the media industry judge what is right and wrong based on political stance and cannot uphold an impartial voice which is a core value of journalism. “Fair and impartial” is the purpose of True Report. Although our media is not pro-China or anti-China, if we express political opinions that anti-China people disagree with, we will face rejection with the fixed mindsets of the current media industry in Hong Kong. As a result, in Lee’s later stage of seeking nomination, Lee did not mention True Report in her Chinese bio to prevent people from preconceptions and judging her easily through “colored glasses”. This move indicates the lack of choice and helplessness media professionals are faced with in the problematic “pan-politicized” Hong Kong.
But Sherry Lee did not conceal her relationship with True Report from people in the media industry, including the individuals Gasper and Bale. The biggest evidence for this fact is:
1) As early as December 2019, Sherry Lee notified Donald Gasper through messenger that she had founded an online media. In May 2020, she had sent him an English article from our media website and invited him to help write for us (see pictures below). Based on that notification, Gasper had already known about Lee’s media website and name, which proves that Lee has never hidden the fact that she operates this media from fellow journalists.
2) When Gasper told Lee on the evening of May 24 that he would ask Cliff Bale on whether Bale could second her candidacy, he again asked about Lee’s current work, and Lee responded immediately with the information that she was the editor of True Report and pointed out that True Report is an online media that strongly upholds the core value of “objectivity” (see picture below). As expected, Lee knew that Gasper would tell Bale about her working organization when she had introduced herself.
Various facts prove that Sherry Lee did not conceal her involvement with True Report at all when seeking nomination. The more critical evidence for this is that the HKJA had sent the candidates’ election platforms to each member, which indicated the work organization and position of each candidate. If Sherry Lee can run for the election, all HKJA members will clearly see the relationship between Lee and True Report, hence how can it be concealed?
Sherry Lee said: “My experience has been nothing but transparent. When I announced my standing for the election, the editor-in-chief of True Report was the first part of my identity that was made known to the public and further reported by the media. And if I am elected, True Report will be the first battleground where I practiced my election platform. This is a natural responsibility and there is no need for explanation.”
Cliff Bale believed the rumours involving Lee without verifying them and withdrew being Lee’s seconder, and had violated journalistic professionalism
Although Bale does not understand Chinese, he can instantly translate the content of our articles into English simply by using the translator function available on the True Report website. Although the translation is not completely accurate, people can understand the general ideas of articles. If Bale had bothered to read our editorials and investigative reports, he would understand that we are “neither pro-China nor anti-China, neither pro-government nor anti-government, neither pro-police nor anti-police.” This can confirm that the accusations made by his “friend” about Sherry Lee and True Report are completely false and can be described as “fake news.”
Cliff Bale was a professional journalist before his retirement, focusing on political affairs. With extensive media experience, in the year 2004, Bale became RTHK’s head of the English newsroom, in charge of 28 staff consisting of sub-editors, programme producers and presenters, and reporters. He had worked in RTHK for 29 years before retiring in 2012. He also Served as Chairman of the HKJA from 1984 to 1986. However, this media veteran relied on hearsay without any verification, and did not inquire from Lee herself on the matter. Bale simply believed in all the groundless accusations he heard about Lee, and informed Donald Gasper (or more) without any verification. Finding a journalist with this attitude and mindset is disappointing and shocking.
Moreover, what is even more worth discussing is that since Cliff Bale mentioned that Benitez withdrew the nomination, it suggests that he had already known that someone “informed” Benitez about the accusation against Lee which caused her to withdraw the nomination. Additionally, he could have learned from the news, the English press releases issued by True Report on Facebook, and even his friends from the HKJA that the association was accused of conducting “election rigging” to prevent Lee from running for election, or from the various suspicions we raised.
Seeing these bizarre incidents of blocking Lee from gaining membership and nominations, an ordinary person would also feel that something is suspicious. But as a former chairman of the HKJA, and serving as the editor-in-chief of the “Freedom of Expression Report” of the HKJA for many years, Cliff Bale paid no attention to the incident and did not publicly condemn or call for an investigation into the election manipulation incident. On the surface, on one hand, Bale seemed to have paid attention to the ethics of the media, but on the other hand he did not pay attention to the immorality of election rigging. The double standards exhibited here are bizarre, and are definitely not the attitude a professional journalist should present. Bale emailed Donald Gasper about the unsubstantiated accusations he heard about Sherry Lee, an act that is defamatory through rumour-spreading. This unprofessional behavior not only indicates Bale being unworthy of his media status but would also have a significant impact on the reputation of Sherry Lee and the True Report.
The Election Committee investigation report stated that “This committee believes that any withdrawal of a candidate’s nomination is a matter between the nominator and the nominee, and the nominator should notify the nominee on their own. The office does not have the authority to disclose any person’s nomination decision before receiving the election form. However, when the office subsequently discovered that there were questions about the information on the election form (it should be nomination form), it had fulfilled its responsibility to clarify the facts with the relevant parties. The Committee must point out that candidates are responsible for ensuring that the information submitted is accurate and the nomination is valid before submitting the application form.”
This reply from the Election Committee deliberately drew a clear line between the HKJA and Benitez’s withdrawal of nomination, but Bale’s email proved that the HKJA was suspected of being involved. His email read, “Mary Ann withdrew her nomination of Sherry upon learning of all this.”, highlighting clearly that someone had provided Benitez with the same false information about Lee (that Lee’s media supported the government, the police, and the national security law), which caused Benitez to withdraw her nomination.
As we have analyzed above, the people spreading the above rumours are most likely high-ranked officials of the HKJA. This is also based on the fact that different incidents also point to the suspicion of the HKJA’s involvement in making Lee encounter many “man-made” difficulties and obstacles in the process of obtaining her membership and nominations, ultimately preventing Lee from running for election.
We highly suspect with reason that Benitez was instigated by the executives of the HKJA to withdraw her nomination to Lee, and cooperated with the HKJA to deliberately not notify Lee of the revocation of her nomination, purposely keeping Lee unaware until the nomination deadline (31 May). As a result, Lee did not have enough time to find another nominee, and was ultimately disqualified from the candidacy. The explanations given by the Election Committee above deliberately avoid answering questions about their questionable acts, leaving the HKJA even more suspicious.
On May 22, Sherry Lee met with Benitez at IFC in Central and obtained two nomination signatures from her. However, from May 22 to 31 (the nomination deadline), Benitez did not tell Lee that she had withdrawn the nomination for her. After Sherry Lee submitted her nomination on the morning of May 31, she contacted Benitez to inform her that she had submitted her nomination, but Benitez did not answer the call. This was the last time Lee contacted Benitez. To this day, the Filipino journalist has not responded to Sherry Lee, nor has she notified Lee of the withdrawal of her nomination and the reasons behind it!
The Election Committee did not inquire whether Benitez was instigated by the HKJA to withdraw her nomination, and is alleged to have been hiding the truth
With Standard reporter Mary Ann Benitez withdrawing her nomination, leaving Lee unable to stand for election, Benitez was a suspect and key witness in the “election rigging” incident. Asking Benitez why she had withdrawn her nomination for Lee should be the important focus of the election committee’s investigation. According to Cliff Bale’s email, it is obvious that someone contacted Benitez and told her the rumours about Lee, convincing her to withdraw her nomination. Any responsible investigation would question Benitez’s actions. If the investigation proves that Benitez’s decision had been instigated by senior officials of the HKJA, it would be proof of the HKJA’s clear manipulation of the election. However, the Election Committee’s investigation report did not mention whether it inquired about the reasons for Benitez’s withdrawal of the nomination. This reflected that the investigation deliberately avoided the main clues and concealed the truth on what happened. It makes people suspect that the HKJA is the mastermind behind “the election rigging”!
Does the spreading of rumours to block Sherry Lee’s candidacy involve the then chairman Ronson Chan and the executive committee? Or does it involve former senior officials of the HKJA of the previous terms? Or is there a bigger force behind it that controls the relevant individuals to obstruct fair elections and carry out questionable actions? These questions are highly worth thinking about.
All in all, Bale’s emails provide important clues, proving that someone is smearing Sherry Lee’s reputation behind her back, preventing her from obtaining nominations, and preventing Lee from entering the HKJA. Now why did they do this? We believe that it is related to the social missions of our editor-in-chief Sherry Lee. One of Lee’s goals in joining the HKJA is to establish a “fair and impartial” media culture in Hong Kong, thereby strengthening the fourth power to monitor the government and society. With the fourth power strengthened, Hong Kong’s governance can be improved. If Hong Kong can reform its governance system and doings, it can improve its economy and livelihood of people, maintain its status as a financial center, and China’s prestige will increase accordingly.
This is a future many Western countries that compete with China and those with vested interests that have controlled Hong Kong for many years do not want to see! To prevent Hong Kong from improving, one of the important methods used by both internal and external interest controllers is through the HKJA. On one hand, they badmouth Hong Kong on how Hong Kong does not have press freedom, causing the development of Hong Kong to decline. On the other hand, they do not take positive actions to strengthen the fourth power to promote improvements in Hong Kong. Is the HKJA related to these interest manipulators, targeting Sherry Lee specifically to label her to prevent her joining the HKJA to stop Lee from kickstarting reforms in the future? This is worth thinking about.
In the next episode, which is the last part of the HKJA’s “Friends Investigate Friends” investigation series, we will expose the remaining information about HKJA’s fallacies and provide the conclusion relevant to the election rigging incident!
We reiterate that in reporting the HKJA’s alleged election rigging incident, no matter how strong the evidence is, the benefit of doubt should go to the defendants. Our newspaper does not rule out the possibility that in the series of press releases involving the “HKJA election rigging” scandal, our analysis of the different suspected people could be not comprehensive enough or could have errors. If wrong, we urge that the relevant people come forward to our media to provide evidence to confirm or correct information. Once verified, we will publish any updated clarifications publicly.
True Report
Below is the link to a series of press releases published by True Report exposing HKJA’s alleged election rigging incident:
https://truereport.hk/tag/%e8%a8%98%e5%8d%94
HKJA’s Election Committee’s reply to Sherry Lee’s complaints in relation to election (Chinese only)：