Woman ‘shot in eye’ loses case over police warrant


  • 2021-04-21 HKT 17:50″ title=”The Court of Appeal ruled that the police’s decision not to give the woman a copy of a search warrant had not obstructed her right to access the courts. Photo: RTHK”>


    The Court of Appeal ruled that the police's decision not to give the woman a copy of a search warrant had not obstructed her right to access the courts. Photo: RTHK
    The Court of Appeal ruled that the police’s decision not to give the woman a copy of a search warrant had not obstructed her right to access the courts. Photo: RTHK

A woman who was allegedly shot in the eye during a protest in 2019 has lost a legal challenge in relation to the police force gaining access to her medical records.

The woman, known only as “K” in court, was found lying injured outside Tsim Sha Tsui Police Station on August 11.

She claimed to have been shot with a bean bag round by the police.

“K” earlier lost a High Court challenge over the police’s refusal to present her with a copy of the search warrant the force used to obtain her medical records from Queen Elizabeth Hospital. She had argued that the refusal infringed upon her right to access the courts.

On Wednesday, the woman’s challenge was again rejected, this time by the Court of Appeal.

Justices Jeremy Poon, Johnson Lam and Thomas Au unanimously held that the police’s decision had not obstructed the woman’s right to access to justice.

The three-judge panel said “K” had failed to explain how the lack of access to the search warrant had prevented her from asking the court to set aside the warrant.

The judges also held that there is no free-standing right for a person to obtain copies of a search warrant.

The lawyer for “K”, Paul Harris, had argued that the police had infringed his client’s privacy by obtaining a search warrant to look at her confidential medical records, and that the force could not simply reject her request to see the warrant on the grounds that it had to protect the integrity of an investigation.

But the judges said the contents of a warrant could reveal information about the investigation process and the person being investigated.

They stressed that while medical reports do contain personal information, police investigations are conducted on a confidential basis.