Undercover security guards in Hong Kong must use ‘minimal’ force, experts say after Mannings case

Privately hired security guards are only empowered to apprehend suspects with minimal force in Hong Kong, experts have warned after a customer was manhandled and wrongly accused of shoplifting in a case that has sparked public debate. Shops should also find a balance between the efficiency of self-service checkout machines and security risks to reap the benefits of technology while avoiding legal liability when preventing theft, a lawyer and an IT expert said. “[Security enforcement] has to be done in a precise manner, instead of just relying on people,” Francis Fong Po-kiu, honorary president of the Hong Kong Information Technology Federation, said on Friday. The expert was speaking after police launched a probe on Thursday into a report that two undercover security guards had grabbed a customer by the neck at a branch of pharmacy chain Mannings and hauled her back into the store after accusing her of shoplifting. Mannings issued a statement on Wednesday saying the guards had been fired and that it had axed its contract with the security firm that had supplied the pair. Fong said stores would need more advanced equipment than surveillance cameras to monitor the rising use of self-service checkout machines, suggesting they could learn from unstaffed shops overseas. “Unstaffed stores don’t really operate on an honour system, as customers are monitored 360 degrees around, but self-checkout cashiers are an honour system,” Fong said. He said artificial intelligence-enhanced surveillance cameras could record hand movements and the number of items held, while radio frequency identification tags could track goods. Lawyer Jonathan Man Ho-ching said security guards operated on the same legal basis as ordinary residents when it came to making arrests. The Criminal Procedure Ordinance stipulates that any person “may arrest without warrant” anyone who they “may reasonably suspect of being guilty of an arrestable offence”. “All enforcement agents conducting arrests, searches and seizures, their power would come from the ordinance [concerned]. There isn’t a specific ordinance that empowers security guards to do so,” Man said. The lawyer said that while stores were entitled to install surveillance cameras and deploy security personnel, they should be careful when introducing enhanced measures to avoid legal liability if clashes like the alleged incident at Mannings happened. “If the person was employed by Mannings, this would affect the company. They would have a legal liability, hence they would need to know the risk when [hiring security guards],” Man said, adding that hiring personnel via a contractor would not excuse the pharmacy chain from the law. Yuen Sze-tung, former council member of the Hong Kong Buildings Management and Security Workers General Union, said that security guards would have to hand over suspects to police for further investigation. “The point of apprehension is to hand them over to police. There is no need to hold the person in a [neck] lock. Telling them not to leave, using language to achieve this goal would already do the job,” Yuen said on a radio show. Retail sector lawmaker Peter Shiu Ka-fai told the Post earlier that the use of plain-clothes security guards was not common practice in the industry, but some chains wished to better protect their interests as many had self-service checkouts in which customers did not have to interact with a staff member before leaving. Police data showed there were 4,415 shoplifting cases between January and June this year, a 12 per cent increase over the same period last year. Under current rules, security guards need a licence to work in the city and must have knowledge of relevant laws around a civilian’s right to arrest, actions that constitute theft, and whether they can conduct searches and record video. Yuen said the right of security guards to apprehend suspects was the same as other citizens. He said security guards had to give warning before using the “lowest level of force” to apprehend a person. But he said while the law did not empower security guards to conduct searches, they could inspect a customer’s bag if the shopper cooperated with the request. “Our principle is that the lowest level of force be used to achieve your aim of apprehending the person. You can hold the person at most, but there’s no need to perform a neck lock, drag them back into the shop or confine them to a particular spot,” Yuen said. The security trainer added that all use of force must stop once the person complied with the apprehension, and there was no need for guards to film a suspect as shops often already had surveillance cameras installed. Shiu said on Friday that it was understandable for shops to hire security guards due to rising theft cases in the city, but warned that stores and their guards should call police once they had apprehended a suspect. “They should call police immediately. If they were to stop the person, they should use appropriate force. If the force exceeds a certain limit, they could risk violating the law themselves,” he said on the same radio show.

Undercover security guards in Hong Kong must use ‘minimal’ force, experts say after Mannings case

Industry expert and lawmaker weigh in on practices of security firms after plain-clothes guards manhandled customer at Mannings store