و
1
Gamming
Ꮧ
Mr. E. Laird
(Hong Kong Department)
(through Mr. Rushford)
Reference.......
17
2.4.
}.
I set out below my comments on the outstanding points in connection with the latest version of the Prevention of Bribery Bill 1970.
i)
9 chd. be grateful (2)
ws. look
9chd. if you
4to this.
E...
244
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY No. 51
AK 1970
HKK 14/18
clause
25-
See pare
?
(14)
10
Clause 10. I have the following comment to add to the views on, this clause recorded in the note at (12), namely, if my recollection is correct, the Hong Kong Government have referred to a provision in the Malaysian Prevention of Corruption Legislation and claimed that it is on the same lines as clause 10. Below this minute is a copy of the only provision in that Legislation which I can find to be relevant. You will see that it does not make the unexplained possession of property a criminal offence; but deals only with proof. A provision on these lines (in place of clause 10) would be acceptable to legal advisers. Also below this minute a copy of a provision in the Indian Prevention of Corruption Legislation. It does not go as far as clause 10, being limited to pecuniary resources or property. But in my view even this provision is objectionable; it is post- independence legislation.
(ii) Clause 14 (1) (a) and (c). I am still of the
opinion that Clause 14 (1) (a) is unreasonably wide. It could be difficult, if not impossible, for a person to give the information requested concerning his parents or in the event of his living apart from his wife, his spouse. The unreasonableness of these provisions is now amply illustrated when one turns to the new clause 20 (b) which provides that in the case of a person accused of an offence "the fact that his failure in any respect to comply with the terms of the notice" served under paragraph (a) of clause 14 (1) may be the subject of comment by the
•
prosecution; even though the failure is due to the fact that he has no knowledge of the circum-- stances under which his parents or his spouse may be living. In most, if not all, cases if the Attorney-General requires information concerning the parents of a person or his spouse, he can serve a notice on the parents or the spouse under para. (d) of this clause, and I would have thought it would be preferable for him to do so. I appreciate that difficulty will arise in cases where the parents or the spouse live outside the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong courts but I do not think that this possible difficulty justifies the unreasonably wide provision of para. (a); anyhow these are the circumstances the suspected person would, probably be unable to comply with the notice. If (a) is to stand in its present
/form