7/17/2020 CACV73/2020 JUNIOR POLICE OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION OF THE HONG KONG POLICE FORCE AND ANOTHER v. ELECTORAL … 41. As regards family members and friends, the person could exercise his or her own judgment as to the reliability of such recipients in protecting the confidentiality of his address before giving them the information. 42. Hence, the fact that people disclose residential addresses from time to time does not undermine the importance of the right to control the dissemination of that piece of information. That right is the subject of protection of the right to privacy. 43. By virtue of the Impugned Measures, such right of control of a registered elector in this respect is taken away. Whilst there are safeguards in place, and we shall discuss those safeguards later, the incursion of the right is nonetheless a substantial one since a registered elector is deprived of any choice to retain effective control over the extent of dissemination of information on his residential address to the outside world if he wishes to exercise the right to vote. 44. The importance of the privacy interest in one’s residential address varies from individual to individual. Depending on personal circumstances, lifestyles and preferences, there are some who place greater regard on the privacy of their home addresses and there are also others who do not mind giving away such information to others. 45. Also the consequences of such disclosure for each individual would be different. For someone who is or has been a victim of stalking or who has the unfortunate experience of domestic violence or may otherwise be targeted for attack, the confidentiality of his residential address would be highly important and the consequences for negating such confidentiality could be serious. https://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/search/search_result_detail_frame.jsp?DIS=128057&QS=%2B&TP=JU&ILAN=en 14/39