New rules on accessing vehicle details raise ethical and practical issues
- The government has since the civil unrest placed much emphasis on protecting privacy. It is important but so is freedom of expression
The conviction of journalist Bao Choy Yuk-ling for her use of a government database, while working on a documentary about a mob attack on protesters during civil unrest in Hong Kong, sent shock waves through the city’s media sector.
Journalists had, for many years, accessed details of vehicle owners by doing such searches. It had not been suggested this constituted a crime. But Choy was fined HK$6,000 in 2021 for making false statements when obtaining ownership details of a vehicle as part of her investigation for the award-winning programme.
The verdict exposed journalists seeking information from the Transport Department’s website to serious legal risks. Thankfully, Choy’s convictions were overturned on appeal last year. The judges said she had been the victim of a “substantial and grave injustice”.
Choy had ticked a box on the database stating she needed the information for “other traffic and transport related matters”. The judges said this was not a false statement as the category covered serious investigative journalism.
But they suggested there was a need for reform as it was broad enough to also permit searches for the purpose of gossip, sensationalism, stalking or unsolicited marketing. The government promised to review the process for this and other databases. New guidelines were released this month.
The arrangements, which came into force last week, raise fresh questions about the extent to which journalists will be able to access the information. A simple process is provided for vehicle owners, those with their consent to access details and applicants involved in matters such as buying or selling a vehicle or pursuing a compensation claim. But applications on other grounds must be made directly to the Commissioner of Transport. They will, it seems, only be granted in exceptional circumstances. Applicants must provide detailed reasons for requesting the information and supply supporting documentation. The commissioner will then decide whether the public interest in providing the details outweighs the privacy rights of the vehicle owner and the interests of society.