Case Description

On May 16, 2023, the Hangzhou police released an administrative penalty decision on a case of gathering people for promiscuity online, which detailed the illegal facts and disclosed the full names of six punished individuals. This incident quickly sparked a heated discussion across the internet. Some netizens with the same name and surname commented on their experiences of "social death" as a result, while more netizens questioned whether the Hangzhou police's behavior was suspected of violating the privacy rights of the six individuals.

Lawyer Analysis

Article 1032 and Article 1033 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code) stipulate that natural persons enjoy the right to privacy. No organization or individual shall infringe upon the privacy rights of others through espionage, intrusion, disclosure, or disclosure. Privacy is a private space, activity, and information that a natural person's private life is peaceful and they do not want to be known to others. Except as otherwise provided by law or with the explicit consent of the rights holder, no organization or individual shall engage in any act that infringes on the privacy rights of others, such as disturbing the privacy of others' private lives, entering their private spaces, disclosing their private activities, or processing their private information. Although in accordance with the provisions of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Public Security Management and Punishments, the police have the right to investigate and punish the behavior of gathering people for sexual misconduct; However, according to the provisions of the Civil Code, the illegal facts recorded in the administrative penalty decision made by the police also constitute the private information of the punished party, which still belongs to the privacy of the punished party.

The Administrative Penalty Law of the People's Republic of China (Revised in 2021) only stipulates that "administrative penalty decisions with certain social impact shall be made public in accordance with the law". However, there are no clear regulations or standards for determining how to have a certain social impact, It is generally believed that only administrative penalty decisions related to "environmental protection, public health, safety production, food and drugs, product quality" that have a significant impact on public interests, as stipulated in Article 20 of the "Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information of the People's Republic of China (Revised in 2019)" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations on Disclosure"), should be actively made public. And Article 15 of the Disclosure Regulations stipulates that "government information related to trade secrets, personal privacy, etc. that may cause harm to the legitimate rights and interests of third parties shall not be disclosed by administrative agencies. However, if the third party agrees to disclose or the administrative agency believes that non disclosure will have a significant impact on public interests, it shall be disclosed." It can be seen that if an administrative penalty decision involves personal privacy, in principle, administrative agencies shall not actively disclose it, Unless it is not disclosed, it will have a significant impact on the public interest.

In addition, Article 14 and Article 15 of the "Regulations on the Disclosure of Law Enforcement by Public Security Organs (2018 Revision)" issued by the Ministry of Public Security stipulate that "when disclosing legal documents to the public, the names of natural persons stated in the documents shall be treated as anonymous, and their surnames shall be retained, with the name replaced by" certain " To disclose legal documents to the public, the following information stated in the documents should be deleted: (1) the detailed address of the natural person's residence, work unit, family members, contact information, citizen ID number, health status, motor vehicle license plate number, and other information that can determine their identity and specific property; (3) information related to citizens' personal privacy and trade secrets; (4) The facts of the case involve elements that are indecent.
Based on the above regulations, the police's behavior of publicly disclosing the full names of the punished individuals in the case of sexual misconduct is inappropriate, and it is suspected of infringing on the privacy rights of the punished individuals.