Full Analysis Summary
Captain's not guilty plea
Captain Wan Wenguo has pleaded not guilty in a Hong Kong court to criminal damage and ship-safety charges over alleged damage to the Balticconnector gas pipeline and an adjacent Finland–Estonia telecommunications cable.
The South China Morning Post reports Wan, 43, is captain of the Hong Kong‑flagged container ship NewNew Polar Bear and pleaded not guilty at Eastern Court to damaging a section of the 77 km Balticconnector gas pipeline, which supplies Finland, and the adjacent cable.
The Independent similarly says Wan, described there as 44, pleaded not guilty to charges that he damaged undersea telecom cables and the Balticconnector natural gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea in October 2023.
Vijesti.me records the plea and identifies him as Wang Wenguo, captain of the Hong Kong‑registered Newnew Polar Bear, saying he pleaded not guilty to criminal damage and to two separate charges of violating ship safety requirements.
Coverage Differences
Contradiction
Sources give different personal details for the captain: South China Morning Post calls him “Wan Wenguo, 43”; The Independent calls him “Wan Wenguo, 44”; vijesti.me uses the name spelling “Wang Wenguo.” These are factual discrepancies in the reporting of age and name spelling rather than differences of legal substance.
Tone
The Independent emphasizes investigator findings and alleged recklessness, using terms such as “reckless” and reporting recovered evidence; SCMP sticks to court charge descriptions and procedural details; vijesti.me includes the AP indictment language and broader regional concerns about sabotage, giving it a more geopolitical frame.
Balticconnector pipeline damage
The alleged incident is dated to October 2023 in the Gulf/Baltic Sea area and is described by sources as causing both pipeline and cable damage.
SCMP reports the damage is alleged to have occurred on 8 October 2023 when the ship transited the Gulf of Finland.
SCMP specifies the pipeline as a 77 km Balticconnector gas pipeline, which supplies Finland.
The Independent reports Finnish investigators’ view that the vessel dragged an anchor that severed the pipeline.
Police recovered a broken anchor from the seabed that tests showed belonged to the ship, which was missing an anchor.
Vijesti.me echoes Finnish conclusions that authorities concluded the vessel was responsible for damage to the Balticconnector gas pipeline between Finland and Estonia in October 2023.
Coverage Differences
Evidence
The Independent includes details on physical evidence (a recovered broken anchor, testing linking it to the ship and that an anchor was missing), while SCMP reports the date and location of the alleged damage and vijesti.me reports the Finnish conclusion and indictment language. The Independent’s reporting conveys investigative detail that the others summarize or omit.
Terminology
SCMP refers to the “Gulf of Finland” and specifies the pipeline length and its role ("77 km Balticconnector gas pipeline (which supplies Finland)"), The Independent frames it as the “Baltic Sea” and focuses on the investigators’ anchor theory; vijesti.me uses the spelling “Balticonector” and connects the incident to regional sabotage concerns.
Differing charge descriptions
Court filings and media sources use different wording and legal framings when describing the charges.
SCMP reports two summary charges under Hong Kong’s Merchant Shipping (Safety) Ordinance, alleging failures to ensure the vessel had sufficient anchors and to submit daily voyage reports to the owner during October–December 2023.
The Independent describes the safety failures as two counts of failing to ensure the ship met SOLAS safety requirements and also reports one count of criminal damage.
Vijesti.me says the AP indictment accuses him of damaging a pipeline and cables without lawful justification, alleges negligence, and frames the charges as violating ship safety requirements.
Coverage Differences
Legal Framing
SCMP cites specific Hong Kong ordinance provisions and precise alleged operational failures (anchors, reports). The Independent uses the international SOLAS safety terminology for the safety counts and couples that with criminal-damage wording; vijesti.me reports the AP indictment’s stronger legal-language phrasing ("without lawful justification") and frames some charges as negligence — showing variance in legal emphasis across sources.
Specificity
SCMP gives detailed dates for the alleged failures ("during October–December 2023") and names the Merchant Shipping (Safety) Ordinance; The Independent and vijesti.me summarise the safety counts more generally.
Jurisdiction and cooperation
All three sources highlight different procedural and international aspects of the case.
They note the case is being heard in Hong Kong because the vessel is Hong Kong‑flagged.
Vijesti.me says the court indicated about 18 witnesses may be called.
The Independent reports 18 prosecution witnesses are expected and that the next hearing is scheduled for May 5.
SCMP reports the plea was entered at the Eastern Court in Hong Kong.
Vijesti.me and The Independent note that Finnish authorities have been involved and have sought cooperation from China in the investigation.
Coverage Differences
Procedure
The Independent provides a scheduled next hearing date (May 5) and mentions the expected number of prosecution witnesses; vijesti.me and SCMP note the trial venue and witness potential but do not offer the specific next hearing date in the provided snippets.
International Cooperation
vijesti.me explicitly reports that “Finland has sought cooperation from China in the investigation,” while The Independent and SCMP report Finnish investigators’ findings and the charge sheet but the snippet of SCMP supplied focuses more on the local charge details than diplomatic follow-up.
Differences in media coverage
Coverage also differs in how the story is contextualised.
vijesti.me places the incident amid "a broader rise in concerns about sabotage of undersea infrastructure in the Baltic Sea since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine," quoting the AP indictment’s language that the actions were done "without lawful justification."
The Independent focuses on investigative detail (recovered anchor and testing) and the charge-sheet wording that the defendant was purportedly "reckless."
SCMP concentrates on the criminal and summary charges and the specific alleged operational failures in navigation and reporting.
Coverage Differences
Narrative Framing
vijesti.me frames the event within regional sabotage concerns and cites the AP indictment’s phrasing; The Independent frames it around investigative evidence and alleged recklessness; SCMP frames it tightly as court charges and specific ordinance breaches.
Language Strength
vijesti.me quotes the AP phrase “without lawful justification” and refers to “negligence,” which is stronger accusatory language than the neutral listing of charges in SCMP; The Independent sits between them by reporting investigators’ findings and recovered evidence.