Key points in the 'leaked judgment'

PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 06 September, 2006, 12:00am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 06 September, 2006, 12:00am

Ching started contributing articles to the Foundation on International and Cross-Strait Studies in 2000 and received HK$300,000 in 'research fees' from it in 2004.


He suspected the true nature of the foundation in 2003 but continued to contribute articles despite knowing that it was a spy institution.


Ching's defence was that he did not know the foundation was a spy agency nor that two chiefs of the foundation were spy agents; his action only constituted leakage of state secrets unintentionally, even if it led to an offence being committed.


Since March 2000, Ching had invited mainland academic Lu Jianhua to contribute articles to The Straits Times on topics such as the Sino-US relationship, Sino-Russian relations, the situation across the Taiwan Strait, the anti-terrorism campaign and the nuclear crisis in North Korea.


Ching had passed four documents provided by Lu, which were classified as top state secrets, and two more involving intelligence to the foundation since May 2004.


Ching's defence was that he had not asked other people to write any articles leaking state secrets.


The foundation asked Ching to provide pictures on PLA naval vessels' visits to Hong Kong in 2004.


Share

 

Send to a friend

To forward this article using your default email client (e.g. Outlook), click here.

Enter multiple addresses separated by commas(,)

For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive