-2
I should not have thought that the courts would
find the wording of clause 10 too difficult.
If the accused
could establish, to the court's satisfaction, that he had
borrowed money, or had large gambling debts, then this would,
I think, be a satisfactory explanation. However, it may be
that some modification of the clause might be made to help
the courts in their interpretation of the clause, if this
would make it easier for the F.C.0. to accept it.
Perhaps
it could be made clear that an explanation would be "satisfactory"
if the accused establishes that the money was not acquired
by virtue of any offence under Part II of the Bill (or the
repealed Prevention of Corruption Ordinance).
If he received the money by other illegal means
(e.g. because he forged currency) why should we be so sensitive
about him having to admit this to obtain an acquittal on a
bribery charge?
Clause 13.
I confirm that it was not intended to confer any
powers of investigation on anyone except on Crown servants.
Clause 14.
Unless the power to obtain information is, potentially
at least, comprehensive, it will be of little use. In
practice, I do not think that the power will be much needed
save in relation to a suspect and his immediate relations.