Panel faulted for bias clears police on protest tactics

HONG KONG — A longawaited report from an official Hong Kong police watchdog group issued Friday said officers used force only in response to threats to their safety during months of antigovernment protests last year.

Police fired live rounds on 12 occasions when they “had reasonable suspicion of lethal force” being used or prepared against them, the Independent Police Complaints Council said in the lengthy report.

Its conclusions are unlikely to convince critics who say officers unnecessarily fired bullets, tear gas, rubber bullets and pepper spray to suppress the sometimes violent protests.

Although described as independent, the council is appointed by Hong Kong chief executive Carrie Lam, leading critics to say it ultimately serves the interests of the proBeijing administration rather than civil society. It has no investigative powers of its own.

The report assessed six days from June to August last year near the beginning of the protest movement, which was sparked by the Hong Kong government’s attempt to pass a bill that would have allowed suspects to be extradited from the semiautonomous territory to face trial in mainland China. The legislation was withdrawn, but the protests continued over several complaints, including a demand that police be held accountable for their heavyhanded response.

The protests began peacefully but at times descended into violence, with clashes between police and protesters leading to accusations that the police abused their power and even colluded with organized crime figures.

The report found “room for improvement” in the police’s handling of clashes with protesters, making recommendations such as a review of the police operational command structure, its guidelines on the use of force and officer training.

Lam said at a news conference on Friday that the report was “comprehensive and objective.”

A panel of international experts appointed to advise the council last November concluded that it lacked the power and independent investigative capacity to conduct a meaningful probe, but the council continued its work.

The human rights group Amnesty International said in March that the council lacked impartiality and echoed protesters’ demands that the government establish a truly independent inquiry.