Long wait for ruling on show that poked fun at the police

The court of appeal will hand down a verdict within nine months regarding an appeal against the Communications Authority's warning issued earlier to public broadcaster RTHK's satirical TV program Headliner for insulting the police and being biased toward the pro-democracy camp.

After a complaint was lodged against an episode of Headliner in February 2020 for smearing the police force and misleading the public, the authority then issued a warning to the broadcaster in May 2020.

One of the segments in the program suggested that medical staff were facing a shortage of surgical masks during the Covid pandemic but police "had a lot of masks in surplus."

And another segment showed the host dressed in a police uniform emerging from a trash can and saying "police have canceled patrols on foot, reducing the chance of being exposed to the air to almost zero!"

The RTHK Programme Staff Union and Hong Kong Journalists Association filed a judicial review against the authority's decision, and the court of first instance in 2021 ruled that the watchdog's findings were partially substantiated

Both the broadcaster and the watchdog appealed the ruling, and chief judge Jeremy Poon Shiu-chor said the three-judge panel will give a ruling within nine months.

Senior counsel Abraham Chan Lok-shung, representing the authority, said media that enjoy the right to freedom of speech have the responsibility to ensure the accuracy of their reports.

He added that the program was purely speculative and satirical against the police, which proved the decision of the authority was correct.

For example, Chan said, there is no factual basis for the claim that the police "had a lot of masks in surplus" and "it wouldn't be an unreasonable take" for some audiences to erroneously think that officers were hoarding them.

Barrister Jeffrey Tam Chun-kit, for RTHK and the Journalists Association, said the station had provided sufficient news reports to support the content of the program but agreed that it was indeed exaggerated.

But he also argued the content of the second segment was targeting the cancellation of patrols, not police officers.

He added that RTHK had invited the police to explain and tried to include a wide range of views in the program, but the police had not responded.