Police officers should be exempt from criminal liability for their actions while on duty, a major police union has proposed.
That is extremely absurd, a civil rights watchdog has responded, saying the suggestion reflected an inadequate understanding of the rule of law and human rights by “some police officers”.
The proposal to indemnify officers was made by the Junior Police Officers’ Association after now retired senior officer Frankly Chu was jailed in December for three months for hitting a passer-by with a baton during the 2014 Occupy protests.
On Sunday, the union posted a letter on their website that the sentencing had led to a “crisis in morale” within the police force, and called for changes to the Police Force Ordinance so that officers can be protected from any criminal liability if they were correctly carrying out orders.
The letter also demanded an emergency meeting with with the civil service secretary and the security secretary within the next seven days to discuss the matter.
Speaking to the SCMP, union chairman Joe Chan said: “I am just a tool at work. I obey orders and execute commands. If I execute [duties] correctly, why should I bear criminal liability for what I have done? This is unfair.”
He also told the newspaper that the Department of Justice does not know how to assess an officer’s use of force, saying they “judge a matter with reference to legal provisions and decide on a prosecution. But they are not professionals on the use of force. Therefore, there is a divergence on how we see the issue.”
According to The Standard, Chan said that since the Civil Service Bureau recognizes verbal assaults as an occupational health hazard, the JPOA would like to have guidelines introduced to prevent policemen from being subjected to verbal abuse.
“Police aren’t only being shouted at, like during the illegal Occupy Movement, there were many provocations such as hand gestures. These situations can be very complicated.”
However, not everyone agrees with Chan. No surprises there.
Civil Rights Observer – a watchdog that was set up after the 2014 Occupy protests – posted on Facebook that Chan’s comments were “extremely absurd”, and “reflected some police officers’ inadequate understanding of the rule of law and human rights”.
The post also goes on to say that legislation that will exempt police officers from criminal liability breaches articles 25 and 28 of the Basic Law, which says all “Hong Kong residents shall be equal before the law”, and that torture of any resident is prohibited.
The civil rights watchdog called on police management to provide more training for officers on the rule of law and human rights.
This is not the first time someone has suggested that police officers should be given special legal protections. In May, pro-Beijing lawmakers pushed for amendments to the Public Order Ordinance that would make it a criminal offence to insult a police officer, though the proposal failed.
The JPOA has about 20,000 members and represents about two-thirds of the city’s police force.
