Government employees in Yangzhou of our very own Jiangsu Province are having their lives made even more miserable as a crackdown on illegal e-bike-usage habits spreads its tentacles even beyond the domain of civil servants. But is it an invasion of personal privacy?
江苏扬州的政府工作人员的生活变得更加悲惨，因为打击非法电动自行车使用习惯的触角甚至超出了公务员的范围。但这是否侵犯个人隐私呢？
On 15 November, a notice issued by the Traffic Police of Yizheng, the county-level City under the administration of Yangzhou, attracted much attention. The notice stated that traffic violations such as e-bike riders not wearing helmets as required will be investigated and exposed. They were also to be reported to their villages, residential communities and employers.
11月15日，扬州辖县级市仪征市交警局发布的一则通告引起广泛关注。通知称，将对电动自行车骑乘者不按要求佩戴头盔等交通违法行为进行调查和曝光。他们还应向所在村庄、社区和雇主报告。
Yet, that notice was only in part true, as media outlet, The Paper, found out when it spoke with Yizheng PSB. That organ then retracted the notification released by the Traffic Police, saying it was flawed in so far as the reporting of e-bike-riding violations to employers is in fact reserved only for civil servants.
然而，澎湃新闻在采访仪征市公安局时发现，这一通知仅部分属实。该机构随后撤回了交警发布的通知，称该通知存在缺陷，因为向雇主报告电动自行车违规行为实际上仅限于公务员。
But while we may or may not feel sorry for them, the first part of the notice still holds true. And that’s what has people in Yangzhou up in arms.
但是，尽管我们可能会也可能不会为他们感到难过，但通知的第一部分仍然适用。这就是让扬州人奋起反抗的原因。
Specifically, the new ruling states that from 15 November, the aforementioned punishments shall be applied to e-bike riders who do not wear safety helmets, run red lights, ride in the opposite direction, do not ride in their designated lanes or have sunshades installed, plus many more offences.
具体来说，新规定规定，自11月15日起，电动自行车骑乘者不戴安全头盔、闯红灯、逆向骑行、不按规定车道骑行、安装遮阳伞等违法行为的，将受到上述处罚。
Such violations will be investigated and punished, with evidence thereof collected from surveillance cameras to be used to shame offenders by way of various media platforms and outdoor electronic displays.
此类违法行为将受到调查和处罚，并通过监控摄像头收集证据，通过各种媒体平台和户外电子显示屏来羞辱违法者。
The question therefore becomes, does the new ruling infringe on personal privacy?
那么问题来了，新的裁决是否侵犯了个人隐私呢？
Sun Yongbiao is a partner at Beijing Dacheng (Nanjing) Law Firm. “The party should be informed in advance and allowed to defend themself. If the detailed identity information of the party is directly reported to villages, residential communities and other organs, the procedure is inappropriate”, Sun said.
孙永标是北京大成（南京）律师事务所合伙人。 “应该提前告知当事人并允许其进行辩护。如果将当事人的详细身份信息直接报告给村、社区等机关，程序是不恰当的”，孙说。
Another lawyer, who did not want to be named, also said that the current law does not clearly stipulate whether a party’s personal information can be reported for minor violations. As such, the ruling has no legal basis.
另一位不愿透露姓名的律师也表示，现行法律并没有明确规定是否可以举报当事人个人信息的轻微违法行为。因此，该裁决没有法律依据。
Back where we began, with those poor civil servants, a representative of Yizheng PSB noted the increase in e-bike accidents in recent years. The reporting of illegal behaviour on two electrified wheels to the employee’s government organ can persuade them to be a role model in encouraging all e-bikers to consciously wear helmets and to travel in a civilised and safe manner.
回到我们开始的地方，仪征市公安局的一位代表和那些可怜的公务员一起指出了近年来电动自行车事故的增加。将两个电动轮违法行为向员工所在机关举报，可以起到表率作用，鼓励所有电动自行车骑行者自觉佩戴头盔，文明安全出行。
