Gently easing into new week…

Remember when RTHK’s Bao Choy was cleared on appeal after being prosecuted for accessing the vehicle registration system? The government has now responded – by making access to the system much harder. Standard editorial…

[The government’s measure] could also go against the spirit of the top court’s judgment, as commonly understood, when it could have been fairly simple for the authority to conform with the spirit without complicating the matter to such an extent.

Did the CFA not already state in paragraph 62 that “whilst such rights are not absolute and may be restricted where necessary, there is no reason to proceed from a starting point that bona fide journalism should be excluded from the phrase ‘[o]ther traffic and transport related matters'”?

[Transport Commissioner Angela] Lee could have readily aligned with the CFA ruling by simply inserting a footnote to the original form to include “bona fide journalism” as a valid reason under “other traffic and transport-related matters” in accordance with the CFA’s view.

…Worse still, the hurdles being put up by the transport department set a poor example for company, land and other searches crucial to journalistic duties.

Not to mention the duties of lawyers and investment analysts.

HKFP op-ed on the apparent decline in the right to have a lawyer present when talking with police, with reference to Agnes Chow and Tony Chung…

There is nothing in the national security law’s Article 43, which deals with police powers, to suggest that any new right is being conferred to deprive defendants and others involved in legal proceedings of their right to counsel.

…People involved in involuntary interactions with the police are entitled to have a lawyer present. Requiring them not only to engage in such interactions without counsel, but also not to consult a lawyer afterwards, is oppressive…

And another Jimmy Lai trial graphic, raising the question: is the trial about actions or opinions?