My Take | Time to review restrictions on reporting of bail hearings
- It is in the public interest that the principle of ‘open justice’ is respected in cases involving the national security law. The media should be free to report them
One of the core features of Hong Kong’s legal system is that court cases are open to the public. This keeps the judges on their toes and boosts understanding of the judicial process.
The principle of “open justice” is especially important in national security law cases, as the legislation imposed by Beijing is in the early stages of implementation. Developments should be subjected to public scrutiny.
Most people rely on the media to keep them informed. It is, therefore, a concern that the ability of journalists to report bail proceedings – the initial battleground in security cases – is severely limited.
The Criminal Procedure Ordinance imposes tight restrictions. Only six types of information can be reported, including the name of the defendants and the charges. The court can lift the restrictions if this is “in the interests of public justice”.
These rules have been a thorn in my side as a reporter and editor for many years. Bail hearings are often highly newsworthy, allowing early insight into criminal cases. But most of what is said cannot be reported. Journalists have sometimes breached the restrictions and got away with it. But they need to be careful as taking a risk could result in six months’ jail. The media have, therefore, generally observed the restrictions in high-profile security cases.
This means most of what has been said in the hearings sits dormant in reporters’ notebooks. The public is being denied access to important information concerning the application of the law.