The government has tightened its search in recent months, and the judiciary no longer provides the personal data of the defendant and the prosecution officer, explaining that it may impair the proper execution of judicial work.
The Hong Kong Journalists Association wrote to the Judiciary on the incident earlier and met with representatives of the other side.
Three months later, the Judiciary received a written reply, stating that new measures will be taken from September 1st, including providing the defendant’s residential area, the police district and the unit of the prosecution officer in charge on the charge.
However, the defendant’s address and identity card number, as well as the names and ranks of the prosecution officers that were available for inspection in the past, are still not available for inspection.
The HKMA was disappointed with the new arrangement and believed that it had still failed to properly verify the identity of the defendant and safeguard the public's right to know.
Since the end of March, the judiciary has tightened access to information on charges.
(Profile picture)
The Journalist Association wrote to the Chief Justice Zhang Juneng of the Court of Final Appeal on May 25 to inquire about the media's access to information on the charges, and met with representatives of the judiciary on June 18, after 3 months to Monday (August 30) Received a written reply from the Judiciary.
The judiciary stated that the defendant’s residential area will be provided on the charge statement. If the defendant is a non-individual unit such as a company or organization, the full company or organization address will be provided.
As for the information of the prosecution officer in charge, the police district and its affiliated unit will be provided, as well as the case number.
According to the Association, the original intention of the arrangement for accessing charges was based on the principle of judicial openness to strengthen the public's confidence in the judicial system. The deletion of important information on charges by the judiciary is inconsistent with the principle of judicial openness, and it also seriously affects the work of the media and the public's right to know.
Although the judiciary has relaxed to a certain extent, the relevant arrangements have not been able to properly verify the identity of the defendant and safeguard the public's right to know.
The Records Association has issued multiple statements in recent days, approving a series of measures by the government to suppress freedom of the press.
(Photo by Zheng Zifeng)
The new arrangement fails to confirm the identity of the defendant, affecting news reports
According to the Association of Records, the "name, age, nationality, and occupation" referred to by the judiciary is not accurate enough to allow the media to identify the identity of the defendant. In particular, the occupation is only reported by the defendant, and most of the society in Hong Kong For Chinese, there is very little difference in nationality; and in professional news reports, confirming the identity of the person involved in the report is an important part. The information under the new arrangement does not fully confirm the identity of the person concerned, which seriously affects news reports, investigative reports and court news. Integrity and credibility.
In the past, the media could look up the defendant’s name, nationality, reported occupation, address, and ID number; and the information of the police officer in charge in charge of the case, including the name, police district and rank, etc.
However, the judiciary pointed out that since the detailed residential address is highly private information, it is difficult to avoid the risk of leakage or nuisance to the defendant or his family.
Therefore, in addition to providing the media with the defendant’s name, charges, and other information, and trying to provide the defendant’s age, gender, nationality and occupation, as of the end of March, the defendant’s residential address will no longer be provided.
As for the information of the prosecutor’s supervisor, he only provided departmental information because he initiated the prosecution on behalf of the relevant department and did not act in his personal capacity.
The Judiciary deletes a number of information on the charge and the media is unable to access the Record Association: Affecting the principle of openness The Magistrates' Court and more information about the accused are suddenly deleted. The government tightens the company search. Improved arrangements to make it easier to distinguish registrants. The government notices that it will be gazetted on Friday to tighten company searches. Only 7 categories of people can request protected information.
01News
