Should Hong Kong abolish the offence of scandalising the judiciary?
Hong Kong has faced several cases in recent years, but England scrapped the offence in June 2013
In Hong Kong, making ill-advised statements against courts or judges may land you in jail for scandalising the judiciary. It is contempt of court if a person, by words or conduct, intentionally or recklessly creates a real risk of undermining public confidence in the administration of justice.
Criticism is fine, especially in a place that treasures freedom of expression, but it should offer "reasonable argument or expostulation" and be "within the limits of reasonable courtesy and good faith", however outspoken or vigorously expressed.
What is prohibited is "scurrilous abuse" - a "personal attack on a judge in abusive language that vilifies the judge rather than simply pointing out his errors" - or the imputation of improper motives or bias without any justification.
This is not the same as a charge of defamation or libel, which aims to protect an individual's reputation; the concern is with people's confidence in the administration of justice, an essential condition of the rule of law.
The city has had at least three such cases.
The first is the infamous case of a local newspaper that waged a "campaign against the judiciary" as revenge for decisions made against it in several cases. The campaign consisted of a series of articles that alleged in abusive language a conspiracy between the courts and government to persecute the newspaper. It culminated in a three-day, round-the-clock paparazzi-style stalking of a Court of Appeal judge.
