THE current debate over media ethics and intrusions into privacy is not unique to Hong Kong. Major Western democratic countries have undergone similar debates in the past, often following abuses far worse than anything that has been alleged in the SAR.
In some countries, the industry has responded by setting up non-statutory press councils to investigate any complaints. This self-regulatory approach has met with much success, especially in Britain. There, a Press Complaints Commission, with a majority of members from the public, now provides a largely effective channel of redress. It successfully insists on its rulings, however critical, being prominently published in full in the newspapers concerned.
Nevertheless, when the Law Reform Commission subcommittee recently investigated the issue, it opted for a very different solution. Although described as a press council, the body it proposed has little resemblance to those which bear that name elsewhere in the world.
Instead it would have a statutory framework and the right to appoint its members would be ultimately, albeit indirectly, derived from Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa. Together with a power to impose sanctions, such as fines of up to $1 million, this has raised concerns about a serious threat to press freedom.
In its report, the subcommittee acknowledged the potential danger of this, since a statutory body with even limited powers could always have its remit expanded at a later date, to take on an active censorship role. It insisted these concerns were groundless, partly because the Basic Law promises a fully elected legislature, which would be unlikely to approve this.
But such fears cannot be so lightly brushed aside, especially on the basis of such an over-optimistic assessment of the prospects for full democracy. When recent comments by mainland officials have already cast a shadow over press freedom, any step in this direction would be very dangerous. That explains why the subcommittee's proposal is so strongly opposed by the media and many other concerned groups.
That does not mean the alternative is to do nothing. Last week, the Newspaper Society of Hong Kong unveiled a proposal for an independent and non-statutory press council, which could address privacy concerns without any adverse implications for press freedom.
