Police misconduct allegations during the 2019–20 Hong Kong protests

Complaints against the police are handled within the police force by the Complaints Against Police Office (CAPO), whose work is monitored by the Independent Police Complaints Council (IPCC) – a government-appointed entity staffed by laypersons independent of the police.[3][22] The body lacks credibility with some members of the public as its appointees are predominantly pro-establishment, and a significant number among them are allied with CY Leung, the previous chief executive officer.[22] The council has no power to subpoena documents or witnesses, make definitive judgements and hand out penalties. A panel of international experts was hired to assist the IPCC investigate the 2019 protests, and it proposed giving it more power to launch a full investigation into officers' conduct. When this request was denied, many members of the panel resigned.[11]

Security consultant and former police officer, Martin Purbrick, said that the police organisation is beset with organisational and management problems. Its rigid structure and culture "does not lend itself to creative ideas from junior management in times when existing rules are not working". Management has demonstrably been unable or unwilling to control rogue elements in the force.[3] The police have often defended their actions with provocative explanations, and an analysis in Quartz suggested that police responses to criticism reflect their confidence that they will not be investigated.[3] Head of HKPORI, Dr Robert Chung, said that the police had completely deviated from the good practices set up in 1994 under the Service Quality Wing.[23] He suggested trust could be restored by greater discipline of police officers, whose lack of self-control had led to an escalation of civil violence; he also believed all uniformed officers should clearly display their identification on the field and refrain from infiltrating demonstrators.[23]

The case of Indonesian journalist Veby Indah highlights the difficulty for victims of police violence in holding police accountable. Indah, while covering a protest for the Indonesian-language newspaper Suara, lost sight in one eye after being hit by a projectile allegedly fired by a police officer on 29 September as she was filming. Her request to the Hong Kong Police Force for the identity of the officer responsible remained outstanding at the end of December.[24] Since the protests against the ill-fated bill began, Hong Kong authorities have relied on the city's police to maintain order in the face of mounting protests. Not only has the government invoked sweeping colonial-era laws to ban the wearing of masks, it has eased operating restraints of the police: A leaked document showed the government loosened guidelines on the use of lethal force one day before a student was shot: "officers will be accountable for their own actions" was deleted from guidelines.[15][16] The lack of restraint exercised by the police, to the extent that being captured on film is no longer a deterrent to misconduct, has undermined its standing and legitimacy in society.[2]

Although chief secretary Matthew Cheung apologised for the delayed police response to the violence in Yuen Long, saying the force's handling of the incident "[fell] short of people's expectations", he backtracked the next day after police unions reacted angrily. Cheung then proclaimed that the police had "fulfilled its duties in maintaining social order under enormous stress at this difficult time".[25] Hong Kong Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, continued to support the police and has refused outright to criticise their misconduct, let alone set up an independent judicial inquiry.[2] More than 30 leaders from across society, notably including former chief justice Andrew Li, have publicly called on the administration to launch an independent inquiry, but this is staunchly opposed by police unions.[8][9] The newly-promoted commissioner Chris Tang said that independent scrutiny would be an "injustice" and a "tool for inciting hatred" against the force.[16] Government opposition to an independent inquiry has lent credence to the idea that it actively endorses police violence. No police have been held accountable for their excesses as at the end of December 2019.[2] The inevitable conclusion many members of the public have drawn is that the police have total immunity.[2] Police sources of Washington Post have said that a culture of impunity pervades the police force, such that riot police often disregard their training or became dishonest in official reports to justify excessive force. Commenting on police performance against guidelines one officer said that "commanders are too afraid to upset the front-line officers, so if their behavior is not too far away from the guidelines, then they’ll just turn a blind eye [to excesses]".[16]

According to Police General Orders set by the commissioner of police, plain-clothes officers must show their warrant cards and explain their identities while exercising their police power and dealing with the public.[26]

While uniformed officers must to show their warrant cards unless it would "affect the operations, harm the safety of the officers, or if the requests were unreasonable", members of the Special Tactical Squad (STS), known as "raptors", apparently stopped displaying identification numbers during crowd control operations on 12 June, while press photographs taken just two days earlier showed officers displaying them.[26][27] In the Legislative Council, secretary of justice John Lee defended the change, saying that the uniform has "no room" to display the identification numbers. The pan-democrats criticised the lack of identification, saying that their absence would make officers unaccountable.[27] The issue of law enforcers without visible identification has been a major source of complaints since the protests erupted.[28][29] There was considerable public anger at on-duty police officers failing to display their numbers or warrant cards during a demonstration in early July.[26] It is contended that the lack of numbers is a tactic to avoid responsibility.[26] As of October there are at least five judicial reviews against the police force about officers not displaying their identifying numbers on their uniform.[30]

Since the invocation of the emergency law, officers began wearing face masks, making identification even more difficult.[28] The police have defended officers' use of "protective gear".[31] Vice-president of the IPCC, Christopher Cheung, claimed that members of the STS squad have the right to hide their identification number because they "have to enforce laws without having to worry about the consequences". He backtracked a day later, although he expressed fears that officers' identification numbers might be misused.[32] However, by October, police said they had put in place a system of unique identifiers so that an officer could be identified even without his or her warrant number.[28][30]

Hong Kong police subduing a protester

Since the protests began, police officers have come under criticism as images and videos surfaced showing their treatment of protesters who had been arrested. There have been numerous instances where officers have been accused of abusing protesters after they had been subdued, and the police have either denied or been provocative in their responses.[3][64] Riot police officers have been seen in online videos surrounding subdued protesters, kicking, punching, or clubbing them, to be stopped only by residents or by colleagues.[65][66] Another common technique is kneeling on the necks of protesters to subdue them;[67] or banging demonstrator's heads to the ground, causing further injury;[68][69] stomping on the heads of subdued protesters during arrests are commonplace.[70] Police also often dragged already subdued protesters along the ground – a tactic defended by the claim that they had been "uncooperative".[71]

In widely circulated video recordings of an alleged assault on 21 September in Yuen Long, an unarmed volunteer from the Protect Our Kids Campaign was arrested and taken to an alley and surrounded by about 30 riot police officers and apparently abused.[72] The volunteer, having shouted at a police officer who had pepper-sprayed a 73-year-old colleague, was then dragged into the midst of a group of police and kicked.[73][72] He was later taken to hospital. The incident was filmed by a local resident; police attempted to disrupt the filming by shining flashlights at the camera.[74] In response to the allegation, Senior Superintendent Vasco Williams asserted that officers had kicked a "yellow object",[75] Police finally acknowledged that the "object" in the video was indeed a man, but denied officers had kicked the man, who police accuse of having bitten an officer.[75] Claudia Mo condemned Williams for dehumanising the protesters.[76] The assault is a reminder of an incident during the 2014 Hong Kong protests in which seven police officers dragged an activist into a secluded location and took turns to assault him for several minutes.[72]

The police were also accused of tampering with evidence. When Fong Chung-yin was arrested for possessing "offensive weapons" – which were found to be unpowered laser pointers – police officers inserted batteries into his laser pointers to show to the press that laser pointers can cause a fire. The press expressed concern that the police had interfered with the judicial process.[77] A video of an arrest of a protester on 11 August appeared to show a police officer placing a stick inside the protestor's backpack, but the police force denied accusations and said that the protester had held the stick before he was arrested.[78]

While the police maintain that they have respected the "privacy, dignity and rights" of those in custody according to regulations, allowing detainees transport to hospitals and communication with lawyers and their families", Amnesty International criticised them for "arbitrary arrest and retaliatory violence against arrested persons in custody", and described some of these violent actions as "torture".[65] Some detainees reported sustaining injuries ranging from head wounds to fractured arms following their arrests and some were admitted to hospital after their detention. In September, 31 people detained in San Uk Ling were sent to North District Hospital, among whom six were seriously injured with bone fractures.[79][80] The police prevented lawmakers from inspecting the San Uk Ling Holding Centre, where many of the detainees were held.[81] The request by six justices of the peace to visit the centre was rejected.[82] The police ceased using the holding centre to "stop speculations".[75] Robert Godden, the cofounder of Rights Exposure, a British human rights group, reported that arrestees were deprived of sleep and had limited access to food. He also reported hearing "howls of pain" that had "went on for five minutes" during his time in detention inside a police station in Ho Man Tin.[83]

The police were accused of sexually abusing protesters. In Tin Shui Wai, the crotch of a female protester was exposed during the arrest process. The female protester in question also alleged that an officer verbally abused her, calling her "prostitute". A female protester accused police officers of conducting a gloveless strip search on her and allegedly using a pen to spread her legs open.[84] The police denied the accusation.[85] A student from Chinese University of Hong Kong accused a male police of hitting her breast during her detention in the San Uk Ling Holding Centre and reported that other detainees "have suffered sexual assaults and torture by more than one officer, regardless of gender".[86] According to a survey by Association Concerning Sexual Violence Against Women (ACSVAW), 23 women out of 221 respondents blamed the police for sexually harassing them, eight of them reporting that they suffered sexual violence while they were in detention.[87]

Some detainees reported that the police had denied them access to lawyers.[88] Some lawyers have reported that the police have obstructed them from meeting their clients, and that they were reluctant to co-operate.[89]

A police officer draws his gun against protesters

The Hong Kong Police Force has been accused of instilling a general climate of fear: The police were also accused of making arbitary arrests by the Amnesty International. Lawmaker Ted Hui added that the police, after failing to arrest the radical protesters, turned to arrest peaceful protesters, bystanders, young people in general, and people wearing black clothes.[80] The allegations resurfaced after a rally on New Year's Day, during which more than 400 people were arrested, including three members from Civil Rights Observer. Police have admitted that some of the detainees may have been innocent bystanders, but said that such people would be released "after further enquiries". Legislator Alvin Yeung said that mass arrests were "totally unreasonable and groundless", and demanded if police had "any instructions or any legal basis to conduct the preemptive arrests"[90]

On 23 June 2019, representatives from the medical, health services, and legal sectors on the Hong Kong Election Committee jointly proclaimed that police had arrested five people seeking public hospital treatment after having eavesdropped on nurses' conversations, and threatened some nurses to try to obtain patient details. The representatives urged the police to respect patient confidentiality, so that patients can seek the care they needed from hospitals without fear.[91] The staff from Tuen Mun Hospital staged a sit-in on 18 October to protest that male officers were being allowed to enter the hospital's maternity ward; armed riot police had also intruded in the hospital, disrupting its operations and scaring patients and staff.[92] As police had been conducted hospital arrests, protesters became reluctant to go to public hospitals for treatment. Pierre Chan, the lawmaker representing the Medical sector, claimed to have evidence that police had access to data on patients "because of a loophole".[93] He added that many of those injured in protests opted not to go for treatment for fear of arrest, and those medical professionals treating the wounded feared being charged by the police.[94] Underground mobile clinics sprang up, operating out of borrowed cars, which many patients attended, often staffed by junior doctors who wished to remain anonymous, fearing arrest or repercussions from their employers.[48][93][95]

Police banned a protest in Yuen Long on 27 July due to fears that protesters may have clashed with local villagers.[96] But after that protest, the police continued to ban marches in various places in Hong Kong. On 18 August, the Civil Human Rights Front (CHRF) held an approved rally at Victoria Park, and went ahead with an unauthorised march, which more than a million people attended.[97] The demonstration was largely peaceful and CHRF filed a judicial review challenging the police decision to ban the demonstration.[98] As police had rarely banned marches previously, CHRF representatives criticised the more recent bans by the police, alleging that refusal to issue permits had eroded Hong Kong's freedom of demonstration.[99]

On 29 and 30 August, just a day before the proposed march on 31 August, the police arrested at least eight high-profile activists, including Joshua Wong, Agnes Chow, and Chan Ho-tin, as well as lawmakers including Cheng Chung-tai and Jeremy Tam.[100] RTHK reported that Au Nok-hin was arrested for allegedly assaulting and obstructing a police officer during a protest on 8 July, while Apple Daily reported that the lawmaker was accused of assaulting the officer with a megaphone that was "too loud".[101] Demosisto's vice-chairperson Isaac Cheng condemned the police for rounding up various activists to frighten Hong Kong people from protesting, even though these protests have been leaderless.[102]

The treatment of medical and paramedic personnel at the hands of the police during the siege of Polytechnic University was criticised by Hong Kong surgeon Darren Mann as having a "chilling effect [on] would-be volunteers from offering their services in the much-needed medical care of injured people".[103]

The police were accused of using undercover officers to infiltrate the protesters. These officers refused to show their identification numbers when approached by journalists. Then-deputy police chief Chris Tang admitted that the Force had deployed undercover officers who were disguised as various "characters," but he refused to disclose how many agents were involved.[104]

Undercover officers have been accused of committing arson:[105] a video circulating on the internet showed what appeared to be undercover officers who proceeded to set fire to the Wan Chai MTR station.[106] Another showed Molotov cocktails thrown in the Wan Chai area by black bloc who appeared to have distinctive markers of police operatives.[107][108] Senior Superintendent Kelvin Kong said that undercover operatives' main objective was to arrest radical and violent protesters; he rejected claims that officers partook in arson, saying "The police would never commit any illegal acts, let alone arson, when we are in disguise."[106] Another video showed plain-clothes officers exiting a police vehicle and proceeding to dig up bricks from the pavement; the police had no comment.[106] The police were found to have deployed undercover officers during the 31 August protest, one of whom fired a warning shot. Police claimed that the undercover officer has identified himself before shooting.[109] An officer dressed as a black bloc protester was found inside Sheung Shui station which was closed at the time. When the officer realised he was being recorded, he aimed his flashlight at the camera and threatened to pepper spray the cameraman. The police have since acknowledged that he was a plain-clothed officer "conducting an investigation."[110]

There have been incidents where riot police have mistaken undercover operatives as protesters when making arrests or when using pepper spray; police claimed these to have been "misunderstandings," leading to accusations that either uniformed police have been acting abusively and arbitrarily, or that the plainclothes officers had committed unlawful acts and were caught by riot police.[111][112]

The police used tear gas to disperse the protesters

The Hong Kong Police Force fired more than 10,000 volleys of tear gas in the five months between the start of protests in June 2019 and November 2019.[113] Police were criticised by pan-democrat legislators for firing teargas at the CITIC Tower from several directions on 12 June, effectively forcing a group of protesters against the building because it was impossible to evacuate.[114] Police use of tear gas often affected bystanders, and children, the elderly, and pets residing near protests.[115][116] The public has complained of tear gas being shot near a home for the elderly[117] and in the corridor of a public housing estate.[118] Police have been observed firing tear gas on empty roads after the protestors had retreated or dispersed, or lobbed over walls of a police station[119] – a tactic defended as necessary to create safe buffer.[120]

A set of non-lethal weapon cartridges used by the police

Several video clips captured tear gas canisters apparently being fired from high up of the Government Headquarters, which Police Foundation president, Jim Bueermann described as "reckless" and potentially lethal because of the velocity canisters fired from a height can attain by the time they reach ground level.[121][122] The police denied improper use, claiming the canisters filmed were "optical illusion" of canisters that had been fired from lower levels.[123] Police shooting sponge grenades from the rooftop of Kwun Tong police station on 4 August was also against international safety guidelines.[124]

Deployment of tear gas inside Kwai Fong station on 11 August was condemned by experts, as indoor use may cause a stampede and the concentrated chemicals pose severe health risks without adequate ventilation.[125][126] Media was concerned about the use of tear gas as it may harm innocent commuters, and accused the police – who called the station a "semi-open space" – of creating a "gas chamber".[127]

Since 28 July civilians and protesters have collected spent canisters[128] and found that some of the used cannisters had been past their use-by date. On 12 August the police admitted that they had used "canisters of tear gas past their use-by date". Karen Mak, a lecturer from University of Hong Kong, told RTHK that expired tear gas, upon heating, may produce toxic gases such as phosgene and cyanide,[129] though the police insisted that the expired tear gas would not induce additional harmful effects.[130]

Citizens have been directly hit and injured by exploding tear gas canisters. On 2 November a volunteer medic was struck and seriously burned. The medic, a student of Hong Kong Shue Yan University (SYU), did not have a gas mask and was surrounded only by journalists and other medics at the time of the incident. The university expressed "serious concern" over the incident and requested details from the police, as SYU students rallied in support of the injured medic and condemned police violence.[131][132]

The extensive use of tear gas sparked public health concerns as residents feared that when heated, the chemicals may react and release dioxin.[113] A reporter was diagnosed with chloracne, a condition associated with over-exposure to dioxins, following sustained exposure to tear gas.[133] The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department have refused to disclose the chemical composition of the gas, as the police wished to keep it secret.[134] The Department of Health and Hong Kong Poison Information Centre of Hospital Authority reported that there was no literature or scientific evidence on dioxin poisoning cases from tear gas exposure.[113] The Environmental Protection Department suggested that they had found no anomalies in dioxin concentration levels. Secretary Wong Kam-sing commented that the burning of items by protesters would be the cause for any increase in dioxin concentration.[135]

Police kettled a group of protesters near the CITIC Tower on 12 June. Streams of teargas forced protesters against the building with nowhere to go.[114]

During the 14 July protest in Sha Tin, conflict broke out inside New Town Plaza after the police stormed the shopping centre and prevented people inside from leaving. The police had ordered the closure of the MTR station, which is accessible through the mall, making it impossible for people to evacuate.[136] The Civil Rights Observer criticised this tactic as risking the safety of other bystanders,[136] while Civic Party lawmaker Alvin Yeung accused police of "chasing people like a pack of wolves, pepper-spraying and beating them indiscriminately", and asked the police to publicly explain why they concluded that there were unlawful activities inside the mall that warranted fully equipped riot police moving in. Yeung questioned why police failed to stop further ingress and to give sufficient time for bystanders inside to evacuate.[137] As a consequence, more than 20 people were admitted to hospital – two in critical condition and four with serious injuries.[136]

During the Reclaim Tuen Mun Park march on 21 September 2019, the police displayed a warning flag several minutes after the legal, authorized march has begun.[138] Two and a half hours after the official start, and while many were still waiting to leave the starting point, police abruptly withdrew their approval for an authorised rally on New Year's Day, citing violence, and required all demonstrators to disperse within 30 to 45 minutes; 400 people were arrested, many for illegal assembly, including three human rights observers.[139] The organisers criticised the police order to disperse the million marchers within such a short period was not reasonable.[139] Alvin Yeung criticised the cancellation and subsequent arrests as being tantamount to be entrapment for illegal assembly.[90]

Police officer draws his gun on a reporter on 29 February 2020.

The police have been accused of interfering with freedom of the press and of assaulting journalists during protests. Incidents cited by journalist associations include being assaulted or being "deliberately jostled", of which 27 cases were documented in June alone;[140] pushed, beaten, and pepper-sprayed;[141][142] and shining strobes or other high-intensity lighting at journalists or blocking line of sight to prevent or obstruct reporting.[30][39][143] These actions, according to Hong Kong Journalists Association, were perpetrated by the police even after yellow-vested journalists had disclosed their identities.[144] On 6 August, a reporter from Tai Kung Pao was temporarily detained for assaulting a police officer.[145] During the 31 August protests, police refused to let reporters enter Prince Edward station – which the HKJA condemned as an infringement of their rights. In the absence of trustworthy sources, rumours about deaths spread like wildfire, further eroding trust.[39] Journalists were also surrounded by uniformed officers and prevented from asking suspected undercover officers questions.[146] In September, Committee to Protect Journalists cited news reports and online videos and noted that police had targeted teargas canisters directly at several people in Causeway Bay who were clearly identified as journalists. One projectile hit a journalist in the helmet and then exploded near another.[147] After implementation of the anti-mask law, officers were observed forcibly removing reporters' respirators and masks, despite clarification by secretary John Lee that reporters were exempted from the law.[28] The Foreign Correspondents' Club of Hong Kong – which had called for an independent investigation into police violence against journalists and interference with the media's right to cover the protests under the law since start of the protests in June – once again expressed its concern in September that violence against journalists and interference of their work were continuing unabated.[148]

Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) and the Press Photographers Association (HKPRA) issued a joint statement alleging that some police officers had treated journalists brutally and obstructed their work by pepper-spraying them in a weekend protest in Kowloon, and decried violence and intimidation directed at journalists.[149] During the clashes between protesters and police, nine journalists from different media were affected and two had pepper-spray directed at their faces.[149] Some were also shot by rubber bullets, or sprayed by water cannon trucks.[150][151] Their equipment was also damaged by the police. Due to sustained exposure to tear gas, some journalists reported having symptoms such as breathing difficulty and persistent coughing.[129] The HKJA staged a silent march against police brutality on 14 July which attracted 1,500 people, and the association had already filed at least 10 complaints relating to these injuries to the Independent Police Complaints Council.[152][153] Indonesian journalist Veby Mega Indah's right eye was permanently blinded after she was hit by a rubber bullet at close range on 29 September.[39] Police said that some people dressed as journalists had "counterfeit press badges" and had "attacked police officers".[39]

On 28 October 2019, Hong Kong Free Press photojournalist May James was arrested while working in Mong Kok. According to the Foreign Correspondents Club, although she had been wearing a press vest and was carrying a valid press pass and other credentials, she was arrested and held overnight before being freed the next day.[148] Police said that James was uncooperative, and had "refused to comply" when asked for her ID card, and James said she was probably arrested for asking masked officers to display their warrant cards.[154] James had been arrested following an afternoon rally in Tsim Sha Tsui, during which police reportedly behaved violently toward other journalists.[155]

Six reporters from different news organisations staged a silent protest at a routine police press conference on 4 November, when each wore a safety helmet with one Chinese character, which, when combined, read "investigate police violence, stop police lies" (Chinese: 查警暴止警謊). Police suspended the conference as the reporters refused to either take off their helmets or leave the venue, stopped its online live stream, and cancelled the entire press conference 20 minutes later.[156][157] Coinciding with the protest they coordinated, HKJA and the Hong Kong Press Photographers Association issued a statement denouncing the arbitrary arrest of journalists.[156] Later that day the police staged a live broadcast on Facebook to express their views on the protests over the weekend.[158] In late November, i-Cable News became the first news organisation in Hong Kong to lodge a formal complaint against the police with the CAPO for mistreatment of at least 23 of its staff over the previous five months. The catalogue of incidents included being obstructed from reporting, pushed, pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed, hit with water cannon, and targeted with strong flashlights, and had their gas masks forcibly removed.[154]

The HKJA and the HKPRA accused a police officer of doxxing after the officer had stopped and searched a reporter and deliberately held his ID card in front of a live-streaming camera. Police admitted that "[t]here was something inappropriate about the police officer who was responsible for stopping and searching [the reporter]", and promised to "actively look into the incident", while the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data said that there was "prima facie evidence" the law had been broken.[159][160]'

A journalist from NBC accused the police of sexually assaulting her during the protest on 26 January. She was then pepper-sprayed after she attempted to ask other officers the ID number of the said officer.[161]

The police were accused of arresting first aiders with false accusations, which prompted hospital staff to stage sit-in protests. The police were also accused of obstructing emergency medical treatment for arrested protesters.[162] For instance, the police prevented first-aid workers from treating the wounded after the police stormed and locked down Prince Edward station on 31 August. Legislator and medical professional Kwok Ka-ki called that police strategy a "behaviour unbefitting of monsters".[47]

After university student Chow Tsz-lok fell from the third floor of a car park to the second floor during a police dispersal operation in Tseung Kwan O, the police were accused of obstructing an ambulance from reaching him, delaying his treatment.[163] Chow died four days later.[164][165] But Leung Kwok-lai, the Fire Services Department assistant chief ambulance officer (Kowloon East), however, stated that the ambulance assigned to Chow was blocked by buses and private vehicles but that the ambulance did not come in contact with the police that were on duty.[164]

The police arrested 51 volunteer medics during the siege of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and held them.[166] Police claimed that protesters were disguising themselves as medical workers, but Dr Arisina Ma, president of Hong Kong Public Doctors’ Association, criticised the police for arresting the medical workers and detaining them for 24 hours and then forcing them to post bail instead of simply checking their professional identification and releasing them.[167] Surgeon Darren Mann, who had witnessed medics being hogtied and who had telephoned both the Red Cross and Medecins Sans Frontieres asking them to intervene, criticised the police for treating medical personnel like terrorists. Writing in Lancet, he called police arrests of these first-aid workers "almost unheard of in civilised countries". With PolyU under complete lockdown, wounded protesters inside were deprived of all forms of first aid, until the Red Cross and Médecins Sans Frontières intervened.[103]

On 20 October 2019, police clearance actions saw blue-dyed water being sprayed on the gates of the Kowloon Mosque, leading to condemnation by CHRF and the Muslim community in Hong Kong. The police and chief executive Carrie Lam apologised to the Muslim leaders. But the former Indian Association of Hong Kong president Mohan Chugani, who was sprayed outside the mosque alongside lawmaker Jeremy Tam and businessman Phillip Khan, refused to accept Lam's apology, while Khan believed that the police intentionally sprayed the mosque and that the act was an "insult to the Islamic religion".[168]

A traffic police officer was accused of driving his motorcycle into a crowd of protesters in Kwai Chung on 11 November, resulting in two injuries.[169] The officer was then suspended from duty and the police explained that the motorcyclist "tried to separate his colleagues and the rioters" after an officer had temporarily lost his vision from protesters spraying an unknown substance in his face.[170]

On 18 November, in Yau Ma Tei, a police van suddenly accelerated into a crowd of protesters, causing a stampede in which STS officers exiting from the van chased after protesters; the police defended the high-speed driving by their officers: "[driving] fast doesn't mean it is unsafe".[171] The police denied the stampede, but it was confirmed by the Fire Services Department.[172]

On the evening of 13 April 2020, the police intercepted a 21-year-old college student in Kwai Fong Estate near Kwai Chung Police Station and found 2 petrol bombs in their bags. After further investigations, a police officer was suspected of attempting to frame the protester for throwing a petrol bomb at the Police Station. On 20 April, a 38-year-old sergeant stationed in Kwai Tsing Police District was arrested for alleged "obstructing justice" as he self-directed the petrol bomb case.[173]

Several arrestees at a protest on 31 March 2020 were required by police to remove the metal strips from the surgical masks which they wore as a protection against the coronavirus pandemic, saying that these posed a danger. On 1 April, some lawyers and legislators condemned this requirement as an abuse of the health crisis.[174]

After the government had passed a law banning social gatherings of more than four person during the COVID-19 pandemic, the police was accused of abusing the law. This included bringing strangers together at the scene of protests, and then issuing a fine to them for violating the restrictions. Civil Rights Observer, a human rights organisation, criticised the police for suppressing "expression and peaceful assemblies". The police responded by saying that their actions have strengthened "citizen’s vigilance and discipline for public health".[175]

Lawyers pointed out that police operations to disperse crowds inside the mall without the consent of mall owners Sun Hung Kai Properties violated the Police General Orders.[176] Police officers without warrants have reportedly threatened store managers and private security personnel who deny them access to premises with arrest on obstruction charges.[177] Police entered Amoy Garden and MOSTown to conduct arrests on 13 September and 8 October respectively, both without management's consent.[178][179] During the 30 October protest, police forcibly broke into the lobby of a building within a public housing estate in Tuen Mun and ordered residents to kneel with their hands in the air or behind their backs. Residents alleged that the police made them kneel for more than half an hour. On the same day, the police also forcibly dragged two shop owners out of their shop and then arrested them for obstruction after they refused the police entry.[180]

Police officers face accusations of verbally assaulting protesters and journalists: Although the police force motto is to “serve with pride and care”, numerous new videos appear each week where police officers shout “cockroaches” at protesters, bystanders and journalists alike. This epithet also appeared in an open letter from the chair of the Junior Police Officers Association (JPOA). The practice has continued unabated, and front line officers have continued using the term despite an internal memorandum from a senior police officer calling on his staff to refrain from using the term.[181] Accusing protesters of desecrating the graves of lawmaker Junius Ho's parents, the JPOA said the vandals "cannot be called human."[182][181] Returning the insults, police are often referred to as "dogs", or "terrorists" for instilling terror over citizens.[181][183] The police's public relations branch distanced itself from these claims, saying that it was not ideal for the force to use such terms, while a police community relations officer said that the term "cockroach" could be interpreted as a compliment because cockroaches are "full of life, and can survive in harsh conditions", while dogs are considered loyal and obedient;[184] secretary for security John Lee said that citizens dissatisfied with police conduct can submit a complaint.[181]