 |
| An officer flicks off a protester's goggles and sprays him with pepper |
The South China Morning Post filmed this protester's surrender. It seems that we are now getting a more and more complete picture of how the Hong Kong police operate, together with their definition of "Reasonable Force".
It's clearly bogus, and the "reasonableness" test fails miserably. The incident took place in Tamar Park, behind the government offices, where protesters had been ordered to retreat to. The way it unfolded showed police not just after submission, but humiliation. Playground bullies get away with less.
Police operations to remove protesters take place at dawn, or earlier, when the numbers are lowest, but thankfully the free press of the world is there to bear witness. Police have deemed umbrellas and cling film to be part of protesters' offensive armoury (i.e. that these are offensive weapons), as these tend to neutralise or reduce the effectiveness of pepper spray. Unable to intimidate such clad occupiers with pepper, officers wearing body protection start by snatching protesters' umbrellas. Once removed, they seem pretty ruthless on the offensive. But they don't just attack people who shelter under umbrellas. It seems that any protester who isn't "naked" could be fair game.
 |
| Hey, you! look at me! <squirt> (from a protesters' poster) |
A lone protester stands in front of them with hands raised, one policeman of several in a line approaches him, flicks off his goggles, and pepper sprays him directly in the face. Then ten officers surround him, shove him and push him to the ground. Arguably, he should have knelt down at that point, but I see that's just a technicality with respect to what follows. When he is lying on the ground in foetal position, the police officers give way to the riot squad, who surrounds him. They order the media to retreat, probably so that they can "interrogate" him before arrest. It's absolutely surreal.
You can arrest somebody for illegal assembly – the charge made for most of the arrests of this morning – whether that person is standing or sitting or lying down or doing the jitterbug, or whether he is silent or mouthing off. It doesn't take ten uniformed officers and four riot police to subdue one protester who has both arms in the air. The arrest could simply have been made by first reading him his rights, hand-cuffing and then swinging the protester's cuffed arm behind his back, as is traditionally done – you've seen that enough times already in TV dramas. This incident, captured so clearly by objective footage, erases any doubts I had about the claimed "maximum restraint" in firing tear gas and in subsequent policing.
Then there is this even more damning video: A male protester, Ken Tsang, a member of the Civic Party, was hauled away by several police officers to a dark corner and appeared to have been "interrogated" for about four minutes by at least two police officers using their fists and boots, according to a TVB news bulletin.
No doubt some will compare the police actions here to those in Los Angeles, or in mainland China, or "anywhere else", but please remember: the point is that Hong Kong isn't LA – one of the most violent cities in the world. There is much street violence in LA and PRC, and their cops are equally notoriously violent. Hong Kong isn't "anywhere else" either. The city boasts one of the lowest rates of violent crime in the world, so it would not be fair to make that comparison.
I think we have seen enough of these to begin to realise they are not isolated cases. I didn't want to believe the Hong Kong police would act in this way, and it makes me want to cry for the state of our once admired police force. These types of shameful systematised violence have obviously found their way into police operating procedures. They may have borrowed or brainlessly copied methods used in other police forces whilst failing to adapt them to local conditions (applying only half of the maxim "Think global, act local"). This led to the huge tactical error that brought tens of thousands of Hong Kong people onto the streets after 28 September. It might be the usual (and acceptable way) of dealing with Triads, who themselves use violence, but it's clearly an unacceptable way to treat an ordinary citizen. This is another huge tactical error. I call this excessive force. The stupid and wanton act is now on the world's front pages. Although the Secretary for Security has announced that "the personnel concerned have been transferred away from the current positions", he didn't say nor imply that they have been suspended. That's too little, too late, and two steps shy of acceptable practice.
Further reading:
*"Video of Apparent Beating of Protester in Hong Kong Stirs Anger". Keith Bradsher, The New York Times
*香港「佔中行動」最新消息 (10/14/14 @7PM) TVB USA (Warning: Extreme graphic violence)
*O'Sullivan, Adrian (15 October 2014). "Transparency and Fairness in the Hong Kong Police Force"