7/17/2020 CACV73/2020 JUNIOR POLICE OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION OF THE HONG KONG POLICE FORCE AND ANOTHER v. ELECTORAL … 106. Seventh, Mr Leung submitted that as there were other registers open to public inspection containing similar information, one should not single out the electoral registers for blame. With respect, as the challenge in the present case is about the Impugned Provisions, the Court must address the proportionality of the same. There is no question of singling out the electoral registers for blame, whether in respect of doxxing (as to which the Judge made the finding against the casual connection with the inspection of electoral registers) or the other forms of interference with the right of privacy. As already said, it is not appropriate for us to examine the proportionality of the publication of similar personal data under other regimes as it is not the issue in this appeal. But we note that, at least in the context of the Companies Ordinance Cap 622, there are apparently proposed changes (though not yet come into operation) towards giving more recognition to the right of privacy regarding residential address, see Section 644 and the proposed Companies (Residential Addresses and Identification Numbers) Regulation[17]. 107. Eighth, though he did not urge the Court to adopt a double proportionality analysis, Mr Shieh submitted that the freedom of press should also enter into the equation in the overall balancing exercise. As it would be clear from what has been said so far, we are keenly aware of the role played by the press in maintaining the integrity of the electoral system and we do not wish anything in this judgment to be read as suggesting that such role should be reduced. It should also be clear from [89] and [90] above that we do not see the need to have the limited discretion we think is called for being exercised to restrict inspection by the press. 108. For these reasons, we are of the view that Section 20(3) as it stands interferes with the BOR14 and BL 26 rights of those registered electors who have safety concerns over the unrestricted public inspection of their Linked Information in a manner which is more than reasonably necessary to achieve the Transparent Election Aim. The absence of any limited discretion to permit some restricted form of inspection of the registers, in our view, renders the section disproportionate. https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=128057&QS=%2B&TP=JU&ILAN=en 35/39