Claims Of Police Brutality Not Verified, Court Hears

The Department of Justice told a judicial review hearing at the High Court on Friday that it shouldn’t take at face value claims that police officers had used excessive force against journalists covering anti-government protests, while the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) countered that the sheer number of complaints levied against the police by frontline reporters lends credence to their accusations.

The HKJA is asking the court to declare that the police have acted unlawfully in failing to facilitate the work of the media, and in some cases actively hindering their work; while the Police Commissioner should be held accountable for failing, or refusing, to investigate and address these "operational deficiencies".

In Friday’s hearing, Senior Counsel Philip Dykes, representing the HKJA, said reporters are protected by the law in carrying out their their duties.

However, he noted that on multiple occasions, they were pepper-sprayed by the police even while there were no protesters nearby, or were the targets of verbal abuse by officers, who sometimes also shone bright lights directly at them.

Jenkin Suen, representing the Department of Justice, said the statements given by some journalists are merely ‘assumed facts’.

He told the hearing that a judicial review is not a fact-finding forum, and stressed to the judge that all claims made by reporters have not been investigated or verified.

Suen added that the police have not given their side of the story.

The lawyer also said even if the allegations were true, one should consider the circumstances before accusing officers of failing to facilitate the work of journalists.

Suen said as there have been some 400 protests since last year, complaints against individual officers do not mean the entire force is at fault.

But the applicant's lawyer said a large number of statements filed by reporters showed something must be wrong with police as a whole, and appealed to the judge to review video backing up the allegations.

Dykes also said officers should have communicated with reporters before taking action, instead of threatening them with arrest.

He added officers should be able to distinguish between protesters and reporters, as journalists generally wear helmets, high visibility vests and their press cards.

But Suen said police have seen counterfeit press cards at protests, and even though authentic media workers have the right to report the protests, there are certain restrictions because of concerns about public safety.

For example, Suen said reporters can't use their job as an excuse to obstruct police.

In response, Dykes said any media workers who act like protesters could be held criminally liable, but if they're simply doing their jobs and police use force to affect their work, then officers, he said, would be breaking the law.

The High Court will hand down a judgment at a later date.