The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) recently claimed that some journalists and their families had been intimidated or harassed.

First, I want to unequivocally denounce any acts of intimidation and harassment directed at journalists.

Hong Kong is a society governed by the rule of law, and no one should intimidate or harass others — this is illegal. Similarly, journalists must abide by the law just like everyone else. The media is not a lawless no man's land, nor are journalists an ungoverned group. Journalists should not use freedom of the press as an excuse to harass others. This is why I strongly opposed the actions of Apple Daily reporters who harassed the family of then-chief executive Leung Chun-ying and then-executive council member Franklin Lam.

Journalists are sometimes described as “the fourth estate” and should cherish and respect the public’s right to know. They need to strictly adhere to the boundaries of press freedom and should not arbitrarily weaponize their pens to disturb those with differing political views, especially by invading their privacy. Conversely, those dissatisfied with the political views of journalists should not invade journalists’ privacy or harass their families and associates. While I have my doubts about the HKJA’s accusations, I have zero tolerance for any “doxing” behavior. I support a thorough police investigation and also support the Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data in investigating whether the alleged intimidation is true. The HKJA’s allegations are grave and must be investigated according to the law to reveal the truth to society.

Second, I must remind the public that before evidence is verified and the truth comes to light, it is inappropriate to label and smear individuals. According to the HKJA, some harassers claimed to be acting in the name of patriotism. Some commentators have linked these harassments to patriotic individuals, and used this to smear patriots, a stance I absolutely disagree with. Without a thorough investigation, attributing blame to patriots seems like intentional sensationalism. Hong Kong remains under the rule of law, and any allegations of illegal actions must be supported by substantial evidence and adjudicated by the courts. One should not tarnish and label patriots simply because someone allegedly committed a crime under the guise of patriotism, thus subjecting genuine patriots to undeserved stigma.

The HKJA also claimed that the harassment was aimed at journalists from small to large media outlets.

If this is true, why hadn’t those media outlets come forward and provided the evidence? Aren’t press freedom, freedom of speech, and the public’s right to know being held in the highest regard by those media outlets? Why should they be worried about reporting the harassment to the police?

Additionally, I must stress that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government has consistently governed Hong Kong according to the Basic Law and relevant legal frameworks, always respecting press freedom. Equality before the law is one of the fundamental principles of the rule of law. Regardless of their background, whether they are from the media or other sectors, everyone is subject to the same regulations. Press freedom is not absolute, and journalists are not above the law, no matter how noble the political cause they champion is deemed to be.

If one overlooks biases and looks objectively at Hong Kong’s situation in recent years, it becomes evident that the HKSAR government has always been responsive to rational criticism from the media. The government’s earlier decision to shelve the municipal solid waste charging plan, for example, was made after taking into consideration public opinions. Similarly, the government recently halted a new round of applications for importing construction workers in response to public opinion. Furthermore, the procedures for Hong Kong vehicles traveling to the Chinese mainland have been optimized in response to public suggestions, shortening the timeframe for journey reservations and cancellations. The Education Bureau has proposed sex education materials, which received strong opposition from many media outlets. The government has never banned these critical voices; rather it has accepted some of their suggestions. This demonstrates that as long as opinions are objective and rational, any media outlet in Hong Kong can freely express different perspectives and opinions.

Data shows that as of Dec 31, 2023, there were 90 daily newspapers in Hong Kong, including 61 Chinese dailies, 11 English dailies, 14 bilingual dailies, and three Japanese newspapers. The number of media outlets has increased annually since the implementation of the National Security Law for Hong Kong. Many international news agencies, globally circulated newspapers, and overseas broadcasting companies have also established their Asia-Pacific headquarters or offices in Hong Kong. This indicates that the HKSAR government’s adherence to the Basic Law and the national security laws, as well as its respect for press freedom, has been fully recognized by both local and international media.

Facts have shown that without legal protection, press freedom would not exist. Everyone should remember the deceased Global Times journalist Fu Guohao, who was beaten and tied up by rioters at Hong Kong International Airport in August 2019, with his legitimate right to report brutally taken away. This painful experience is still fresh in our minds. Without the national security laws restoring order from chaos, without the HKSAR government’s dedication to upholding the rule of law and vigorously safeguarding press freedom, tragedies like Fu’s would only continue to occur, and how could Hong Kong’s journalists focus on advocating for the well-being of people and unabashedly criticizing the government as they do today?

The author is a former information coordinator of the HKSAR government and a member of the Chinese Association of Hong Kong and Macao Studies.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.