The Hong Kong Journalists Affiliation (HKJA) released an announcement on Tuesday that the Transport Division’s refined application process for a Certificates of Particulars of Car to journalists impedes freedom of press.
Within the assertion, the HKJA claimed the federal government did not respect a June 2023 ruling by the Courtroom of Ultimate Attraction (CFA). The case involved a neighborhood journalist making use of for the certificates to conduct investigative journalism for her tv documentary on the 2019 Yuen Long attacks. Within the on-line utility, the journalist declared that the aim of the appliance was “different visitors and transport-related issues” as journalism was not among the many decisions within the pulldown menu. The prosecution alleged that her motion constituted “knowingly making a false assertion in a fabric explicit for the aim of acquiring a certificates” beneath the Highway Site visitors Ordinance.
Nonetheless, the CFA quashed her conviction by adopting a “constructional approach” to offer impact to the constitutionally protected freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The courtroom held that “different visitors and transport-related issues” ought to embody investigative journalism in good religion.
In January, the federal government implemented a brand new coverage that requires journalists to submit a written utility to the Commissioner of Transport in the event that they want to entry the automobile registry beneath “distinctive circumstances.” Following this, a neighborhood media company reported its failed utility makes an attempt. The HKJA asserted that requiring journalists to use beneath distinctive circumstances could be opposite to the CFA’s judgment. It additional contended that the coverage empowered the Commissioner excessively to outline “public curiosity”, which probably creates conflicts of curiosity and materially intervenes with investigative journalism. The assertion additionally said that the extended utility course of neglects the timeliness and confidentiality of reports reporting.
In response, the Transport Division said the Commissioner owes a public responsibility to guard private knowledge and minimise the chance of abuse of non-public knowledge. It reiterated that the CFA recognised there’s a danger of abuse within the authentic utility course of and the refined association solely served to make sure that private knowledge is obtained with out being abused or misused. It said that there exists a mechanism to keep away from conflicts of curiosity when public servants are performing their public duties and steering for the Commissioner to resolve whether or not an utility includes “vital” public curiosity.
