Press Release
March 19, 2025
Given that the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) was twice denied venue rental by hotels last month for its fundraising spring dinner, it will be difficult for the HKJA to hold fundraising events in the future. Due to the significant decrease in memberships in recent years, the funds obtained through membership fees are limited, and the annual fundraising income is believed to be meager. This incident raises concerns about the HKJA’s financial situation and its future development. How long can the HKJA sustain itself with its current funds? Does the HKJA have other sources of funding to support its long-term operation?
However, are these concerns unnecessary? According to our understanding, the HKJA has at least two salaried office staff. It is difficult to cover operational costs solely with annual fundraising, yet the HKJA seems to have sufficient financial resources in the long run. Where does its money come from? Is there an individual or organization consistently providing funds to the HKJA? Who are these funders? Are these benefactors simply concerned about the development of the media, or do they have political motives?
In recent years, these have been issues of concern to the public and the industry.
Reviewing the HKJA’s Accounts is Riddled with Difficulties
However, understanding the financial situation of the HKJA is fraught with difficulties. The HKJA is an organization that advocates for press freedom and should value information freedom and transparency in its operations, but it has failed to disclose its financial situation. The HKJA’s website does not provide annual reports, audit reports, or any channels for public inquiry.
One might think that the HKJA’s website is simply not detailed enough and is not deliberately hiding its finances, but our investigation reveals otherwise. Since February 20th last month, our editor-in-chief, Sherry Lee, former candidate for HKJA chairman and a HKJA member, requested to review the HKJA’s accounts, but faced numerous obstacles. It has been a full month, and the association still has not provided her with any financial data, clearly violating the Trade Unions Ordinance.
This press release exposes the HKJA’s alleged use of “underhanded tactics” to conceal its accounts and the entire process of not providing financial statements to members requesting information for the public to learn more about the HKJA.
The issue arose when Sherry Lee emailed the HKJA on February 20th this year (See picture below), requesting to review the audited accounts for the 12 years from 2010/11 to 2023/24. Her aim was to understand the HKJA’s recent financial situation and sources of funding. She hoped to first find the latest accounts, so in her email, she requested that the HKJA provide the audited accounts and all versions of the registered constitution for the past three years (i.e., 2021/22, 2022/23, 2023/24) by February 26th, and the audited accounts for the remaining years (i.e., from 2010/11 to 2020/21) by March 5th.
Union Members Have a Legal Right to Review Accounts, Yet HKJA Did Not Respond to Emails
Sherry Lee’s inquiry is based on legal grounds. The HKJA is a union registered with the Registry of Trade Unions under the Labour Department according to the Trade Unions Ordinance. Under the Ordinance, the HKJA must establish rules (also known as “constitution”), and these rules must include the matters specified in Schedule 2 of the Trade Unions Ordinance, including “ensure reasonable opportunity for the inspection by members of the trade union of the rules of the trade union, its account books and the registers of the names of the members thereof”.
Due to this regulation, the HKJA’s constitution, which is publicly available on its website, specifies in Rule 13 “Inspection of Books” that “Any member will be allowed to inspect the account books, the registered rules of the Union, and the register of members. Applications must be made in advance to the Honorary Secretary or Honorary Treasurer who will be allowed reasonable time to make the necessary documents available.” Rule 12 “Auditors”，in section 12.3, also stipulates that “A copy of any auditor’s report shall be conspicuously placed at the office of the Union.”
In addition to the rights listed in the registered rules, the Trade Unions Ordinance directly grants union members various statutory rights, including the right to inspect a trade union’s account books and register of members. It also specifies that members are entitled to receive a free copy of the annual statement of account (which must include the accounts of every business undertaken by the trade union) and a copy of the rules.
Thus, it is clear that the HKJA has a legal obligation to provide the aforementioned statutory information to its members. However, since February 20th, when Sherry Lee requested the HKJA to provide statutory documents including account books and the registered constitution, up until the deadline of February 26th given to them by Lee, the HKJA did not respond to her.
On the evening of February 27th, Lee sent another email to the HKJA (See picture below), reiterating her request for the information and inquiring about the reasons for not providing it. In her letter, she concluded by stating, “If I do not receive an email or written response from your association by March 5th, I will consider it as the Hong Kong Journalists Association ‘refusing to provide’ the accounts and the registered constitution to members.”
To prevent the HKJA from claiming they did not receive the email, Sherry Lee stated in her email that she would send the content via WhatsApp to the HKJA’s office. It turned out that the HKJA’s WhatsApp had an automatic reply feature, and Lee received an automatic response immediately after sending the message that evening (See picture below), “proving” that they had received the notification. With this strategy, Sherry Lee left the HKJA with no room to evade! Failing to provide these statutory documents not only severely lacks transparency but also violates the HKJA’s constitution and breaches the Trade Unions Ordinance.
The HKJA Violates Its Constitution by Adding Unauthorized “Rules”，Making It Difficult for Members to Review Accounts
The next day at noon (February 28th), the HKJA finally responded to her (See picture below). Just when everyone thought the HKJA might cooperate and provide the information, they openly violated their constitution by adding unauthorized “rules,” making it difficult for Sherry Lee to access the information. The HKJA’s email stated (see the blue text below):
Our association has received your inquiry to inspect the account books and constitution. We suggest that you come to our office tomorrow (Saturday, March 1st) from 2:45 PM to 3:45 PM to review the documents you have requested.
Please adhere to the following rules when inspecting the accounts and constitution:
1. Each inspection is limited to one hour. If you need to review again, please make another appointment.
2. The content of the documents reviewed must not be disclosed in any form, or shared with others.
3. You are not allowed to take photos or photocopy the documents. If necessary, you may take notes.
Please note that the purpose of allowing members to inspect the accounts and constitution is to provide transparency to members, not for journalistic purposes.
Clearly, the HKJA’s response aimed to create numerous obstacles, making it difficult for Sherry Lee to inspect the accounts:
Firstly, it is impossible for anyone to thoroughly review and digest complex accounts and constitutions within an hour. Although the HKJA stated that an appointment to review the documents could be made again, this approach meant that Lee would never have enough time to verify the accuracy of the data each time, making it difficult to achieve consistent comprehension. The HKJA’s office usually has little activity, and its operating hours are from 9 AM to 6 PM, Monday to Friday. Why did they restrict Sherry Lee to completing the review within one hour? The HKJA’s mention of “making another appointment” is a pretense to make it seem as though they are not preventing Sherry Lee from accessing them, thereby avoiding criticism and legal violation. But in reality, it is meant to hinder Sherry Lee from successfully reviewing the accounts.
Secondly, the “rules” added by the HKJA not only prohibits Lee from photocopying documents at their office but also forbids her from taking photographs, only allowing note-taking. Faced with so much information, how can anyone take notes within an hour? If any issues were found in the accounts, handwritten notes are not quality evidence. The HKJA’s aim might be that even if Lee discovers problematic accounts, she would have no evidence to report or publicly condemn them.
Thirdly, if Sherry Lee discovers problematic accounts, she naturally has the responsibility to inform other members or report to law enforcement agencies, including the Independent Commission Against Corruption. However, the HKJA stipulates that Lee must not disclose the content of the reviewed documents in any form, or share with others. The HKJA further stipulates at the end of the email that the reviewed accounts and constitution must not be used for journalistic purposes. The purpose of these “rules” added by the HKJA is to prevent Sherry Lee from reporting and exposing any issues.
The HKJA Sets Numerous Obstacles Suspected of Hiding Accounts, allegedly Violating the Trade Unions Ordinance
Section 37 of the Trade Unions Ordinance states: “The account books of a registered trade union and the register of the members thereof shall be open to inspection by any officer or member of the trade union or any authorized agent thereof at such times and in such place as may be specified in the rules thereof…”. (See picture below)
In fact, after Sherry Lee sent her first email, the HKJA’s failure to respond and provide information already constitutes a suspected violation of the Trade Unions Ordinance. It was only after Sherry Lee’s follow-up that the HKJA responded, but in their response, they set up numerous obstacles, including a “one-hour review limit” and prohibiting photocopying and photography, making it difficult for Lee to thoroughly review and analyze the content, which allegedly violates the right of members to inspect as granted by the Trade Unions Ordinance.
Section (m) of Schedule 2 of the Trade Unions Ordinance (See picture below) stipulates that the rules of every registered trade union shall “ensure reasonable opportunity for the inspection by members of the trade union of the rules of the trade union, its account books and the registers of the names of the members thereof”. Although Rule 13 of the HKJA’s constitution, “Inspection of Books”, stipulates that “Any member will be allowed to inspect the account books, the registered rules of the Union, and the register of members”, the fact is that the association did not provide Sherry Lee with a “reasonable opportunity” to do so, which is a clear violation of the provisions in Schedule 2.
It is worth noting that Rule 13 of the constitution (See picture below) does not specify the inspection time, nor does it stipulate that each inspection of account books and registered rules must be completed within one hour. It does not prohibit photography or require photocopying, nor does it prohibit members from making the information public. Additionally, Rule 12 of the constitution, ‘Auditors,’ (See picture below) under section 12.3, stipulates that “A copy of any auditor’s report shall be conspicuously placed at the office of the Union.” This provision also does not require members to inspect the audit report within one hour, nor does it prohibit photography, photocopying, or the disclosure of information.
Section 18(4) of the Trade Unions Ordinance, “Rules”, stipulates that “Where any registered rule of a registered trade union has been altered or amended or any rule has been added to the registered rules…” then such altered, amended, added, or newly established rules must be submitted to the Registrar for approval and registration within 30 days from the date of their establishment. (See picture below)
In the email, the HKJA required Sherry Lee to comply with those three ‘rules’ when inspecting the accounts and constitution, which is equivalent to adding additional rules to Rule 13 of the constitution. Lee checked the latest registered constitution of the HKJA at the Registry of Trade Unions, and these ‘rules’ that the association required Lee to comply with were not registered. This indicates that the HKJA unilaterally amended the constitution without obtaining the Registrar’s approval for registration and exercised unregistered rules when handling Lee’s request for inspection, allegedly violating the Trade Unions Ordinance.
In fact, even if the HKJA wanted to register these new “rules”, they would not be approved, because the effect of these “rules” is to obstruct members from inspecting the documents, which goes against the provisions of Schedule 2 of the Trade Unions Ordinance that allow members to inspect the accounts and constitution. Section 18 (3), “Rules” （See picture above）, also clearly stipulates that no alteration, amendment, or addition to the rules shall be made, when “the effect of which is ‘to render the rules insufficient in respect of any or all of the matters specified in Schedule 2”.
What’s more concerning is the HKJA’s phrasing, “Please adhere to the following rules when inspecting the accounts and constitution”, which gives the impression that these rules are part of the constitution and must be followed. This allegedly violates Section 50 of the Trade Unions Ordinance (See picture below), “Circulating false copies of rules, etc.”, which stipulates that it is an offense for any person, with the intent to mislead or deceive others, to send to members or to persons intending to become or applying to become members of the trade union, ‘“a copy of any rules, or of any alterations or amendments of any rules, other than those that have been registered for the time being under this Ordinance, on the pretence that such rules are registered or that there are no other rules of such trade union”. Upon summary conviction, one may be subject to a level 1 fine and imprisonment for 3 months.”.
Trade Unions Must Provide Accounts to Members; HKJA’s Failure to Do So Is Already Illegal
However, Sherry Lee did not fall into the trap. The HKJA sent her the above email at noon on February 28, setting up “rules” in the email to make it difficult for her to inspect the documents.
That same afternoon, she arranged to meet with the Registry of Trade Unions to inquire about the relevant laws. During the meeting, an assistant registrar pointed out that according to the Trade Unions Ordinance, all trade unions must provide to members requesting information: 1) a free copy of the annual statement of account, and 2) a copy of the registered rules for a sum not exceeding $2.
Section 19 of the Trade Unions Ordinance states, “A copy of the rules of a registered trade union shall be delivered by the trade union to any person demanding the same and tendering payment in advance of a sum not exceeding $2.”. (See picture below)
Section 36(3) states, “Every member of a registered trade union shall be entitled to receive free of charge a copy of the statement of account referred to in subsection (1) and the secretary or other officer thereof specified in the rules of the trade union shall deliver a copy of such statement to every member of the trade union who makes application to him therefor.”. (See picture below)
In other words, according to the Trade Unions Ordinance, the HKJA, as a trade union, must not only allow members to inspect information such as account books and registered constitution, but also provide “documents”.
Sherry Lee replied to the HKJA on the evening of 28 February (See picture below). In her email, she reiterated that the HKJA must, according to its constitution, allow her to inspect the audit reports, account books, and registered constitution, and cannot impose any additional terms, “meaning that it cannot prohibit me from taking photos with my mobile phone, there cannot be any time limits on the inspection, and I cannot be prohibited from disclosing the information.”.
Lee also pointed out that according to the Trade Unions Ordinance, trade unions have the responsibility to provide members with copies of the annual statement of accounts and the constitution. In the last paragraph of her email, she wrote, “Please comply with the law and provide me, via email by March 5, with one copy each of the account books for the years 2010/11 to 2023/24 and all versions of the registered constitution that I have requested.”
In fact, the HKJA’s failure to provide the accounts and constitution documents Sherry Lee requested in her emails on February 20th and 27th is already illegal (violating Sections 19 and 36). Since the email was sent, the association has remained silent!
Will the HKJA, which has always stood on the moral high ground, ultimately provide the accounts and registered constitution to Sherry Lee? What “tricks” will they use to escape? Stay tuned for our exciting next episode, to be released tomorrow!
True Report
19 March 2025
This press release is translated from our Chinese Press Release. During the preparation, we used an AI tool, DeepSeek. We have reviewed and edited the content as needed to ensure accuracy of translation.