F
CONFIDENT IAL
16.
Sub-clause 14(1)(c) enables the Attorney-General to require any other person to furnish a statutory declaration or written statement enumerating any movable or immovable property which may belong to or be possessed by him if the Attorney-General believes that such information may assist any investigation or proceedings
under the Bill.
17.
The Governor considers that both these sub-clauses should be retained; that it is essential to have comprehensive powers of obtaining information, since the only effective deterrent to corruption is the fear of detection; that the profits of corruption can be very large and the offender will accordingly take considerable trouble to conceal his gain by making use of friends and relatives to hold the proceeds; and that there is therefore a very strong case for conferring power to require information from those who may have helped the offender.
18.
The department's legal advisers consider that sub-clause 14(1)(a) is unreasonably wide in the amount of information about the private affairs of his parents, spouse and children that an accused person may be called upon to provide. It could, in certain circumstances, be impossible for him to furnish the information requested in respect of his parents or his spouse; the unreasonableness of these provisions is illustrated by Clause 20(b) which provides that, in the case of a person accused of an offence under the ordinance, "the fact of 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 the accused has no knowledge of the circumstances under which his parents or his spouse may be living. In any event, there are other provisions of the clause under which the parents or spouse could themselves be required to provide the necessary information. The fact that difficulties might arise in cases where the parents or spouse are not within the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong Courts is not sufficient to justify the unreasonably wide provisions of sub-clause 14(1)(a).
19.
The department's legal advisers accordingly consider that clauses 14(1)(a)(i) and (iii) should each be amended by the deletion of the words "his spouse, parents or children". They
/ further
...
CONFIDENTIAL