|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
March 8, 2014 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Although police officers from Hong Kong Police are being described by some locals as "licensed thugs" (????????????),documented human right abuses committed by Hong Kong Police are mainly concentrated on the handling of peaceful demonstrations, police brutality leading to death in custody, and its accountability to the public. In the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China, the constitutional document of Hong Kong, enshrined human rights in Chapter III : Fundamental Rights and Duties of the Residents under law, which includes but is not limited to the following articles: Article 27 Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike. Article 28 The freedom of the person of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable. No Hong Kong resident shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful arrest, detention or imprisonment. Arbitrary or unlawful search of the body of any resident or deprivation or restriction of the freedom of the person shall be prohibited. Torture of any resident or arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of the life of any resident shall be prohibited. Article 29 The homes and other premises of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable. Arbitrary or unlawful search of, or intrusion into, a resident's home or other premises shall be prohibited. Article 39 The provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and international labour conventions as applied to Hong Kong shall remain in force and shall be implemented through the laws of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. The rights and freedoms enjoyed by Hong Kong residents shall not be restricted unless as prescribed by law. Such restrictions shall not contravene the provisions of the preceding paragraph of this Article. Image:2002-8-12-zujie3.jpg|right|347px|thumb|Suddenly large numbers of police officers, which massively outnumbered the protestors, encircle them. Image:2002-8-12-xijing2.jpg|right|347px|thumb|Police officers employ hypoglossal nerve pressure technique that causes pain to peaceful protestors and remove them from the scene. All protestors were later charged for "Public Place Obstruction" but later acquitted by the Court of Final Appeal. unverifiedimage Heavy-handed and extremely violent tactics is being used on peaceful protesters, who either protest against local government's policy, or causing embarrassment to the central government of People's Republic of China (e.g., Falun Gong). In 2002, Amnesty International cited the use of force in an incident at Chater Garden where more than 350 police and immigrations officers stormed a group of 200 protesters. The protesters had been peacefully staging rallies against the Court of Final Appeal ruling that the majority of 5,114 people seeking residence in the territory did not have right to stay in Hong Kong and should return to the Chinese mainland. On 12 August 2002, Falun Gong protestors protested peacefully outside the Liaison Office of Central People's Government in HKSAR were forcibly removed from the street by Hong Kong Police with controversal, and as perceived , violent tactics. All were charged with the offence of Public Place Obstruction but the defendents vigorously contested the case. On May 5th 2005 all defendants were acquitted , by the Court of Final Appeal, on the basis of rights enshrined under Article 27 of the Hong Kong Basic Law. It is said that the HKP's subordination to the HKSAR government is the reason that the HKP has to use force on protestors , a bid to maintain their status or, to a lesser extent, avoid being rebuked by the government. It is also said that the choice of tactics is being dictated by the highest levels of the government, and is politically motivated. External sources
Alleged and confirmed police brutality Suspects often complain of the use of torture or perhaps the threat of torture to bluff suspects in order to obtain confessions. Cases of torture and death in custody, while increasing in numbers, are not being properly investigated even in the face of heavy criticism by UNCHR|United Nations Commission on Human Rights (as claimed by the Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor).In the meanwhile violent police officers involved in such cases are let go of lightly by courts , assisted by prosecuters who intentionally charge them with the lighter offence of grievous bodily harm, instead of torture which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment under local legislation. Accountability of Hong Kong police force Unlike their counterparts in some democratic countries like the United Kingdom where all regional police forces are governed by a police authority which consists of elected local councilors and local members of the public, HKP only reports to the Security Bureau of HKSAR government, headed by appointed civil servants from the executive branch of government. Members of public have no influence on local policing policy as the government, practically,is not required to answer to the Legislative Council of Hong Kong|Legistlative Council. Complaints anout the police are not conducted by an independent body , but only by the "Complaints against Police Office" (CAPO), which is part of the HKP institution. The Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) is being setup to independently review every case handled by CAPO. However complaints being made to CAPO are being handled casually and outcomes are mostly biased towards HKP. While the official mission of Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) is to independently review every case handled by, in fact it only acts as a de facto Rubber stamp (politics)|rubber stamp - it has no investigative power, nor can it even hear appeals to CAPO rulings. The rulings of CAPO is seldom being challenged by the IPCC. Calls for reform, from both local non-governmental organization|non-government organisations, political parties as well as the UNCHR, have gone to deaf ears at HKSAR government. These calls are strongly opposed by the police officer trade unions, who view civil liberty and human rights as an erosion of their power. External sources
After the riots of 1967, HKP gained the sweeping power for its officers "to stop the person for the purpose of demanding that he produce proof of his identity for inspection by the police office", when he or she "finds any person in any street or other public place, or on board any vessel, or in any conveyance, at any hour of the day or night, who acts in a suspicious manner". This power is generally considered controversial. Whether or not "Suspicious manner" is solely on the determination of the police officer, and members of public in blonde hair, "suspicious" dress style, new immigrants who don't look like locals, and ethnic minorities are much more likely subject to intimidation by rogue police officers. However, in the book Criminal Procedure in Hong Kong (Published by Longman, ISBN 962-00-4013-9), the writer suggested that the police officer must be able to articulate how the person was behaving in such a way that it could be reasonably thought of as suspicious. Also to be noted is:
External sources The Special Branch of Royal Hong Kong Police, ancestor of HKP, was disbanded in 1995 prior to the transfer of the sovereignty of Hong Kong|transfer of sovereignty. It had been rumoured that it had conducted telephone tapping and secretive monitoring of local Pro-China politicians. See Special Branch The additional power given to the Hong Kong Police Force in the Hong Kong Basic Law|Basic Law Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23|Article 23 legislation regarding national security was highly controversial. According to the National Security (Legistlation Provisions) Bill, a police officer of or above the rank of Chief Superintendent of Police (CSP) are granted powers of searching without a warrant under some circumstances. (See http://www.basiclaw23.gov.hk/english/download/s3200307077.pdf Pp. 9-10) The third amendment of the bill made by the Government, however, no longer granted the HKPF the power to do so. (See http://www.basiclaw23.gov.hk/english/download/CSA-markup-e3.pdf Pp. 12-13) This amendment was only offered in the face of mass protest against the HKSAR Government on the 1st of July 2003, when over 500,000 members of the public marched against the Bill. With the Bill finally being withdrawn in face of widespread public discontent ,including many other reasons not just limited to potential HKP powers,across the territory. Official Web pages
Non-Government organisations
Category:Human rights abuses Category: Hong Kong Government This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Human rights abuses by Hong Kong police".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
![[F]](/images/site.gif){kind=small}
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
All informatin on the site is © FamousChinese.com 2002-2005. Last revised: January 2, 2004 Are you interested in our site or/and want to use our information? please read how to contact us and our copyrights. To post your business in our web site? please click here. To send any comments to us, please use the Feedback. To let us provide you with high quality information, you can help us by making a more or less donation: |