including the freedom to seek and impart knowledge, guaranteed under article 16(2) of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights. Likewise, it enables the public to enjoy their right to seek and be imparted with knowledge guaranteed under the same article. 22. Fourth, all this means that any restriction on open administration of justice necessarily represents a compromise of these important interests, rights and freedoms, and must be justified by considering and balancins all pertinent interests, rishts and freedoms, including in particular those mentioned above. 23. Fifth, the case law has firmly established that the following considerations or matters do not by themselves justify any restriction on open administration ofjustice: (1) Publicity of litigation leading to embarrassment and inconvenience: Re Wong Tung Kin [1989] 1 HKLR 93; Ex parte New Cross Building Society, at p.235F. (2) Publicity leading to economic damage, even very severe economic damage: R v Dover Justices, Ex parte Dover District Council and Wells (1992) 156 JP 433. (3) Professional embarrassment and possible damage to profession reputation: Ex parte Kaim Todner, at pp.975H976C. 16