Hong Kong has long been regarded as a model of press freedom, but recently its reputation has become somewhat tarnished. The most recent example of this was the unprecedented raid of news media offices by the territory's Independent Commission Against Corruption, which has caused anxiety among those in the industry.
The operation was in response to the press naming a witness held under protective custody in an anti-graft case concerning Semtech International Holdings. The court expressed its dissatisfaction that the name had been leaked and called the for the Department of Justice to investigate. They put it in the hands of commission, which, on July 24, sent out officers to search the premises of eight newspapers.
Apart from "turning over" their offices, the commission even confiscated reporters' computers and material related to the case. The home of an Apple Daily reporter was also searched. With the use of almost 100 personnel in the operation, the commission wrote a new page in the history of Hong Kong's media.
What was it the commission was trying to obtain? The purpose of this massive operation was to obtain the identity of the person who leaked the name of the woman in protective custody; they wanted to know the media's source.
The commission is no stranger to raiding the offices of media outlets. Four years ago, the commission arrested an Apple Daily reporter and searched the newspaper's office on the suspicion the reporter had bribed a police officer to obtain police files.
In this instance, eight media offices were raided simultaneously, making this an unprecedented raid in terms of scale. What is most ridiculous about this is its complete heavy-handedness -- it is using a cannon to shoot a sparrow, so to speak.
The leak was not a major matter. Nor was the person who provided the information a vicious criminal. The Semtech case was only a case of embezzlement. The whole operation was simply to catch someone who had leaked information in a relatively insignificant event, not to catch spies who might compromise national security.
In legal jargon, this is called "disproportionate force." In political terms it is an attempt to muzzle the media. That Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (
The media in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan have all been oppressed in recent years. Media freedom has always been suppressed in China, and not long ago, the chief editor of the Nanfang Daily was sentenced to 12 years on trumped up charges of corruption.
Although the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) used to be a victim of a muzzled media, the victim has now turned into the oppressor and the governing party has also not refrained from raiding the offices of newspapers. This behavior creates an ugly precedent in Taiwan.
Hong Kong used to be the haven of a free press, but in recent years media personalities with a reputation for speaking boldly have one after another been silenced, and the outspoken "news hound" is a dieing breed. If the Hong Kong media does not protest this large-scale search, seek justice for its cause and demand that Tung guarantee media freedom, then it won't be long before journalists in Hong Kong meet the same fate as the chief editor of Nanfang Daily.
A free media must be fought for, and although Taiwan is not a good example of a society with a free media, there is plenty that Hong Kong can learn from us in this respect.
Wang Chien-chuang is president of The Journalist magazine.
TRANSLATED BY Ian Bartholomew
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS