10 Jun 2025集誌社#6886
申訴署刪「訴」｜下架報告何處尋？ 網站時光機全備份 曾稱有版權 轉載會否違例？ 署方：建議諮詢法律意見
The Office of The Ombudsman’s earlier removal of years of reports from its website sparked controversy. Access now requires a written application and an in-person, time-limited visit to the office. However, the Internet Archive, a non-profit organisation, had long backed up the removed reports on the Wayback Machine. Asked whether publicly reposting links to the relevant archived reports, or publicly uploading the report contents, would violate the Copyright Ordinance, the Office told The Collective: “The Office suggests that you seek legal advice.”
申訴專員公署早前刪除網站多年報告引起爭議，現時需書面申請，親身到辦公室限時查閱。不過，非牟利組織 The Internet Archive 建立的平台「網站時光機」（Ｗayback Machine）早已備份下架的報告。被問市民公開轉載相關備份報告的連結，或公開上載報告內容會否觸犯《版權條例》。申訴專員公署回覆《集誌社》稱，「公署建議你諮詢法律意見」。
3 Jun 2025獨媒#6861
【六四36】獵人書店拍賣六四書刊：只是商品、不擔心犯法
With June 4 approaching, many bookstores previously sold books and publications on the subject, but such materials have become increasingly hard to find in recent years. Independent bookstore Hunter Bookstore in Sham Shui Po has recently auctioned several out-of-print June 4-related books and publications, including Wen Wei Po’s *A Record of the Bloodbath in Beijing*, Ming Pao’s special publication *The Tragic Democracy Movement*, and the Hong Kong Journalists Association’s *I Am a Reporter—Imprints of June 4*.
Store manager Wong Man-huen told InMedia that this year the police had neither stationed officers outside as they did last year nor copied down the identity cards of people entering and leaving the store, and that the bookstore had not received any “提示”. Wong said the publications were merely merchandise, and that it was “entirely reasonable” for a bookstore to sell merchandise. She was not worried about breaking the law or facing the risk of arrest.
六四將至，過往不少書店會出售相關題材書刊，但近年買少見少。位於深水埗的獨立書店獵人書店，近日在店內拍賣多本已經絕版的六四書藉及刊物，包括文匯報出版的《血洗京華實錄》、明報特刊《悲壯的民運》、記協出版的《我是記者——六四印記》等。
店長黃文萱向《獨媒》表示，今年警方未有如去年一樣駐守門外及抄下出入人士身份證，亦沒有收到任何「提示」。黃指有關書刊只是商品，書店銷售商品是「十分合理」，不擔心會觸犯法例及有被捕風險。
2 Jun 2025光傳媒#6851
申訴專員公署網頁大刪報告 民間組織接力整理目錄重現人間
The Office of The Ombudsman was found to have removed large numbers of investigation reports, annual reports, mediation cases and related press releases from its website, retaining only materials from the past three years and prompting public outcry. Although the office allows members of the public to inspect the materials in person, it requires them to provide details including the report topic, department involved and month of publication, while not providing a directory of reports that have been taken offline. Over the past week, two civic groups used different methods to locate the relevant materials and reconstructed a directory of nearly 238 reports, covering all reports removed from the office’s website. The Liber Research Community, one of the groups involved, criticised the office for setting a “bad example” in handling publicly available information, raising concerns that other departments might follow suit and make more historically valuable documents unavailable.
The office reiterated that members of the public could submit written requests for information not available on the website. However, after testing the process in person, several media organisations found that applicants first had to complete a form stating the topic of the report they wished to inspect, the department involved and the month of publication. Office staff said that providing detailed information would make it easier to locate the relevant report accurately; if applicants could only provide general information, they would have to wait for a response from the office. As the office does not provide a report directory, members of the public face difficulties in completing the form accurately.
申訴專員公署被揭在網頁刪走大量調查報告、年報、調解個案和相關新聞稿，僅保留近三年資料，引起輿論譁然。雖公署允許市民親身查閱資料，惟要求填寫報告主題、涉及部門及公布月份等資料，卻不提供已下架報告的目錄。兩個民間組織過去一周以不同方式尋找相關資料，重新製作有近238份報告的目錄，涵蓋公署已於網站移除的所有報告。有份出力的本土研究社批評，若公署示範一個處理公開資料的「壞榜樣」，讓人憂慮其他部門會否「有樣學樣」，令更多昔日具參考價值的文件不予公開。
公署雖重申市民可書面要求索取網站以外資料，但多間傳媒親身實測後發現，市民需要先填表格，包括欲查閱報告的主題、涉及部門、公布月份。署方職員表示，提供資料詳細的話，較易準確地查找出相關報告，若只能籠統填寫，則需待公署回應。由於公署不提供報告目錄，市民要準確填表面對一定阻礙。
26 May 2025集誌社#6827
申訴署刪資料｜1.5 小時限閱 6 份文件 紙本形式限抄寫、拍攝、影印 不能燒錄
The Office of The Ombudsman has removed investigation reports and other information from before 2023 from its website, as well as all cases under the Code on Access to Information. Whereas the public could previously view the reports and other information freely online, they must now complete a form under the Procedure for Access to Information Held by the Office to access information not available on the website.
The Collective previously submitted a form requesting all proactive investigation reports from 2013 to 2023 and all Code on Access to Information cases from 2016 onwards. The Office replied today (26th) that each user may access no more than six documents during each 1.5-hour session. It also said the reporter’s request was “too broad” and asked for the names of the reports or relevant content for follow-up. The reporter additionally requested, under the Administrative Charges for Requests for Information from the Office, that digital files be burned onto a USB drive. The Office said it would provide “paper documents” for inspection, and that applicants could bring their own paper and pen to take notes, use a mobile phone to take photographs, or make photocopies at the Office.
申訴專員公署網站刪除 2023 年前調查報告等資料，以及所有《公開資料守則》個案。公眾由以往可在網上自由閱覽報告等資料，現須按《查閱公署資料程序》，填表格查閱網站外資料。
《集誌社》早前填表索閱 2013 年至 2023 年所有主動調查報告、2016 年至今《公開資料守則》個案，公署今（26日）回覆指每名用者每 1.5 小時段最多可索閱 6 份文件，另指記者查閱資料「範圍過於廣泛」，要求提供報告名稱或相關內容作跟進。記者另根據《要求公署提供資料的行政收費》要求將數碼檔案燒錄於 USB，公署指提供「紙本文件」供查閱，申請人可自備紙筆記錄、手機拍攝或於公署內影印。
25 May 2025獨媒#6824
外國記者會主席：新聞自由情況不樂觀 會守住界線
The Hong Kong Foreign Correspondents’ Club (FCC) published a press freedom survey last month, in which more than 60% of respondents said press freedom in Hong Kong had deteriorated over the past year. After the FCC released the results, several pro-establishment figures condemned it, accusing it of smearing Hong Kong. Speaking yesterday (May 24) on the Democratic Party’s online programme, FCC chairman Lee Williamson said press freedom in Hong Kong had been severely restricted since the implementation of the national security law, describing the current situation as not optimistic. He said the FCC’s responsibility at present was to hold the line and continue defending press freedom. Williamson reiterated that the FCC was a non-political organisation and stressed that press freedom was closely linked to Hong Kong’s future prosperity, and that the FCC’s existence was beneficial to this.
香港外國記者會（FCC）上月公布新聞自由調查，超過六成受訪者認為本港新聞自由在過去一年間變差。FCC 公佈調查結果後被多名建制派人士譴責，指抹黑香港。FCC 主席 Lee Williamson 昨日（5月24日）出席民主黨網台節目時表示，香港的新聞自由自國安法實施後受到嚴重限制，形容現時情況並不樂觀，現時 FCC 的職責是守住界線（hold the line），繼續捍衛新聞自由。Williamson 重申 FCC 是一個非政治組織，強調新聞自由與香港未來的繁榮息息相關，而 FCC 的存在對此有利。
22 May 2025獨媒#6813
網台《香港花生》公司及主持同被「查稅」質疑有針對性
The Hong Kong Journalists Association held a press conference yesterday, saying the Inland Revenue Department was pursuing tax matters involving at least eight media outlets and organisations and 20 people, with the total amount exceeding $1.7 million. On last night’s programme of the Hong Kong Peanut online platform, one of its hosts, Andrew Kwan Hang To, disclosed that he personally, his company, Hong Kong Peanut and almost all of the platform’s hosts, including Wong Ho-ming and Dickson Chau, had received similar requests for a “tax investigation”. Each case involved an amount of tens of thousands of dollars, and he believed there was a targeted element to those selected for the “tax investigation”.
記協昨日舉行記者會，指稅務局向至少8個媒體及機構，共20名人士追查稅項，合計款項逾170萬。網台《香港花生》昨晚的節目中，主持之一陶君行透露，他個人及其公司、《香港花生》及該網台幾乎所有主持，包括黃浩銘及周嘉發等，皆接獲類似「查稅」要求，每宗涉及金額達數萬元，認為納入「查稅」的對象有針對性。
22 May 2025獨媒#6817
申訴專員公署發帖 稱新查閱程序「運作暢順」
The Office of The Ombudsman was recently reported by the media to have deleted all investigation reports dated before April 2023 from its website and removed the section on the Code on Access to Information, prompting an outcry. A new procedure for accessing past information took effect on Tuesday (20 May), requiring members of the public to apply to inspect the information. Today, the Office posted that the procedure for accessing its information was “operating smoothly” and said it had processed the first batch of applications, “and arranged for applicants to come to the Office to inspect the information as early as next Monday.”
申訴專員公署日前被傳媒揭發，刪除網站上2023年4月前所有調查報告，以及移除《公開資料守則》欄目，做法引起譁然。公署周二（5月20日）起實施新查閱程序，公眾查閱過往的資料需作申請。今日公署發帖稱查閱公署資料程序「運作暢順」，稱已處理首批申請，「仲安排申請人最快喺下星期一上嚟公署查閱資料。」
21 May 2025集誌社#6811
傳媒被查稅｜ 8 媒體機構、20 記者及家人被查 有人年薪被估大兩倍、被安插商業登記
Following the harassment of several journalists last year, more journalists have been pursued by the Inland Revenue Department for taxes dating back several years. The Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) said at a press conference today (21st) that at least eight media platforms or organisations, including the HKJA, InMedia and The Witness, as well as at least 20 journalists and their family members, had been audited by the Inland Revenue Department and pursued for taxes dating back as far as seven years, involving hundreds of thousands of dollars. In some cases, income allegedly underreported was assessed at nearly twice the person’s salary, a non-existent business registration was assigned to them, and all deposits into their bank accounts were treated as income.
HKJA chairperson Cheng Ka-yu criticised the Inland Revenue Department’s assessments as having no evidence or reasonable basis, describing them as “punishment before trial”. She said journalists had low incomes but were required to pay high taxes, while spending time and money to prove their innocence. This affected the operation of media organisations, created considerable pressure, and negatively affected press freedom and journalists’ integrity. She stressed: “Everyone would cooperate with and accept an investigation that is reasonable and evidence-based, but if they now say these are not being used as a tool to suppress the media, would anyone believe them?” The Inland Revenue Department refused to disclose details of the cases under investigation, saying only that the occupations or backgrounds of those being investigated would not affect its audit work.
計去年多名記者被滋擾後，再有記者被稅務局追收多年前稅款。記協今（21日）召開記者會，表示至少八個媒體平台或機構，包括記協、《獨立媒體》、《法庭線》等，及至少 20 名新聞工作者及其家人，被稅務局審查及追收早至七年前的稅款，涉款數十萬元。當中有人被估算短報的收入比薪金多近兩倍、被安插不存在的商業登記、銀行所有入帳均被當收入等。
記協主席鄭嘉如批評，稅務局的評核無任何證據和合理理由，屬「未審先罰」。她指新聞記者收入微薄，卻要付高額稅款，花時間、金錢自證清白，影響機構運作，構成相當大壓力，對新聞自由和記者誠信有負面影響。她強調，「合理有據嘅調查，大家會配合接受，但如果而家話唔係用呢啲嚟做工具打壓媒體，有冇人信呢？」稅務局拒披露受查個案資料，僅稱受查人士行業或背景不會影響查核工作。
20 May 2025集誌社#6804
申訴公署刪資料｜公開資料變「查閱」 3 頁政策變 6 行程序 不提《公開資料守則》、覆檢
The Ombudsman’s Office website has deleted investigation reports from before 2023 and all cases concerning the Code on Access to Information. It recently announced that members of the public could fill in a form to access information. The website’s original “Public Information” section was updated yesterday to “Access Ombudsman’s Office Information”. The original three-page “Policy on Access to Information” was also replaced by an approximately 180-character “Procedure for Accessing Ombudsman’s Office Information”. The new procedure no longer states that requests for information are handled under the Code on Access to Information, and does not mention the original review mechanism.
OmbudsmanJack Jick Chi Chan told i-Cable News this morning that the deletion of information from the website was intended to make things more convenient for the public: “After all, if you put too much information into a computer system, its speed will definitely slow down.” The office did not explain whether members of the public could obtain copies or photocopies. Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu said the office operated independently and “the Government will not participate”, adding that he believed the office would responsibly “properly handle public opinion”.
申訴專員公署網站刪除 2023 年前調查報告等資料，以及所有《公開資料守則》個案，日前公布市民可填表查閱資料。網站原有「公開資料」一欄昨更新為「查閱公署資料」，原來 3 頁紙的《公開資料的政策》亦被約 180 字的《查閱公署資料程序》所取代。新程序不再表明按《公開資料守則》處理資料索取，也沒提及原有的覆檢機制。
申訴專員陳積志今早回應有線新聞指，網站刪資料是從市民便利角度出發，「始終電腦系統你放太多資料速度一定會慢了」，未有交代公眾能否取副本或複印。行政長官李家超回應事件稱公署是獨立運作，「政府不會參與」，又指相信公署會盡責「處理好社會意見」。
17 May 2025明報#6801
下架舊報告 申訴署稱「沒刪」未答索取程序 前專員指「督促透明」使命諷刺 聶德權：大參考意義需易查閱
The Office of The Ombudsman took down investigation reports and press releases published before 2023, and removed the section on cases under the Code on Access to Information. Information not available on the website must now be requested in writing. The Office told this newspaper yesterday that previously published materials would be retained on a long-term basis and had not been deleted, but did not respond to questions about the details of the written application procedure. A former Ombudsman said the arrangement was ironic, asking: “Is it somewhat ironic that the Office responsible for urging government departments to improve information transparency is doing this?” Nie Dequan, former Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, said government investigation reports had important reference value and, “unless there are special reasons”, should be “properly preserved and made easy for the public to access.”
The Office reiterated yesterday that the website had been updated to ensure the accuracy of its content and management efficiency. It said written applications would be handled appropriately under the Ombudsman Ordinance, but still did not respond on the application procedures and principles, or whether a refusal could be challenged by lodging a complaint with the Office under the Code on Access to Information, and who would handle such complaints.
The Office of The Ombudsman is directly accountable to the Chief Executive, while the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau has a role in overseeing the implementation of the Code on Access to Information. The Chief Executive’s Office and the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau were asked whether they had been consulted by the Office beforehand, whether they endorsed the arrangement, and whether they would urge the Office to restore the materials online. Their consolidated reply said the questions should be directed to the Office.
Veteran media figure Lam Miu-yin also followed up on the matter. In a Facebook comment yesterday, Nie said good governance required emphasis on transparency, public participation and accountability. Reports and investigation findings published by policy bureaux and departments, public organisations and independent commissions had important reference value, and were important to academics conducting public policy research and teachers delivering courses.
申訴專員公署下架2023年前的調查報告及新聞稿等，並移除「《公開資料守則》個案」欄目，需書面索取網站外資料。公署昨回覆本報查詢說，曾發布的資料會長期保存，沒有刪除，但未回應書面申請程序的詳情。一名前申訴專員向本報回應事件稱，「負責督促政府部門提高資料透明度的公署，有關做法是否有點諷刺？」政制及內地事務局前局長聶德權則認為，政府調查報告具重要參考意義，如非特殊原因，需「妥為保存及容易讓公眾查閱」。
倘查閱被拒欲投訴 未答誰處理
公署昨回覆本報時重申，為保網站內容準確及管理效益而更新，又稱會按《申訴專員條例》適當處理書面申請，但仍未回應申請程序、原則等，以及若申請被拒，能否以《公開資料守則》向公署投訴、投訴將由誰處理。
申訴專員公署直接向特首負責，政制及內地事務局則有份監督《公開資料守則》執行情况。本報向特首辦和政制局查詢事前曾否接獲公署諮詢、是否認可做法、會否促公署重新上架等，獲綜合回覆稱應詢問公署。
資深傳媒人林妙茵同樣跟進事件，聶德權昨在林的facebook留言稱，良好的政府管治須重視透明度、公眾參與和問責性，政策局和部門、公營機構及獨立委員會發表的報告和調查結果具重要參考作用，對做公共政策研究的學者和授課教師很重要。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
