Advertisement
Hong Kong courts
Hong KongLaw and Crime

Hong Kong’s High Court throws out union’s bid to have police’s treatment of journalists last year labelled unconstitutional

  • Judge Anderson Chow notes, however, that his ruling ‘must not be read’ as passing judgment on whether police acted unlawfully
  • The Hong Kong Journalists Association had sought declarations that police conduct last year was in breach of the Basic Law and Bill of Rights

Reading Time:2 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
14
Hong Kong’s High Court has thrown out a case by a journalists’ union asking that police’s treatment of the media be labelled unconstitutional. Photo: Sam Tsang
Jasmine Siu
The High Court has thrown out a bid from Hong Kong’s oldest journalists’ union asking it to formally label the police force’s treatment of industry members during last year’s anti-government protests as unconstitutional.
The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) had sought two court declarations that police conduct last year represented an unlawful breach of freedoms of the press, opinion and expression guaranteed by the Basic Law – the city’s mini-constitution – and the Bill of Rights.

Examples of the alleged ill-treatment included journalists being shot with rubber bullets and beanbag rounds; targeted with tear gas, pepper spray and high-powered water cannons; arrested or threatened with arrest; subjected to tactics designed to frustrate proper reporting; and being repeatedly and systematically met with police officers’ refusal to identify themselves.

Advertisement
The Hong Kong Journalists Association hosts a silent march against police violence during protests in July last year. Photo: Warton Li
The Hong Kong Journalists Association hosts a silent march against police violence during protests in July last year. Photo: Warton Li
The association had already won the two other limbs of its challenge, when the same court last month agreed that the system for dealing with complaints against police was inadequate, and that officers’ failure to display their identification numbers during last year’s protests contravened the city’s Bill of Rights.
Advertisement

But Mr Justice Anderson Chow Ka-ming on Monday concluded that the declarations sought in the latest case fell “on the wrong side of the line”, and that it would be undesirable to make “a sweeping and general declaration” that breaches took place.

“Tempted as I am to lay down some guidelines on the legal limits and scope of the police’s duty to facilitate, and not to hinder, lawful journalist activities with the hope of minimising unnecessary conflicts between the police and journalists in public order events, I am ultimately persuaded by [the police] that it would be wrong to decide matters in vacuo,” or without proper context, the judge wrote in a 38-page decision. “It would also be misleading to make declarations of legal duties in unqualified terms without identifying the possible limits or qualifications of the relevant duties.”

Advertisement
Select Voice
Choose your listening speed
Get through articles 2x faster
1.25x
250 WPM
Slow
Average
Fast
1.25x