PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
Commissioner of Police
Pce Headquarters
Arsenal St. Hong Kong
Dear Sir,
BY REGISTERED POST
Fun Ting Chau
147 Woo Sung St.
2nd. Fl. Front Portion, Kowloon
16th Dec. 1973
Re: File No. AC/MKB/891/73 and M/s William
of the Kowloon Anti-Corruption Office
CX
I refer to my letter dated 7th Aug. 1973 to which there has been no official reply from you after almost five months have elapsed.
In his letter dated 17th Aug. 1973 and subsequent ones, the Director of Anti- Corruption, acknowledged receipt of my letters of complaints and informed me that "the matters are being investigated".
•
On 4th Sept. 17th Oct. and 5th Dec. 1973 respectively, I had 3 separate appointments with the above named at their request, and, on the first occasion, Mr. T. W. Henderson was present but he, quite a strong contrast to the abovenamed, took an unbiassed and impartial attitude towards my cases. In the process, however, the attitude and remarks of M/s
aroused my suspicion and are indicators of malpractices /irregularities-----the results of bribery and corruption. In the light of my experien -ce over the past 4-5 months, there is evidence to suggest that-
and
1. The staff of the ACB have passed on details of my complaints to the racketeers
and suspects.
2. The police are not conduiting investigations into my complaints whether in
relation to 'Lo Chin Kuk' or 'Tin Sin Kuk' swindle syndicates or corruption, protection racketeering and what not.
3. Policemen claiming to be "Anti-Corruption Officers" have ties with or at least
have been approached by the racketeers and suspects whom they are supposed to investigate. The above named suggested that I contact the agents for the suspets and racketeers and said that the police consented to such arrangments.
4. In stead of carrying out their duties, they tried to investigate, to find faul -t with and to pers.cute the victim and informant under different false pre- tences.
5. The so-called "investigating officers" have no good intention towards the
victim and the informant.
6. There has been considerable delays in the "investigations" and departures
from generally adopted investigating procedures.
Needless to say, the above malpractices/irregularities not only constitute breaches of duties and disobedience but also a challenge to the authority of the Crown and the Hong Kong Government. The Colonial Secretary and/or the Attorney General have made orders for investigations into my complaints but such orders have not been executed; conversely, the "investigations" into crimes and corruption have resulted in perse- cution of the victim and informant.
As to details of the malpractices/irregularities that have occurred, I enclose here- with a photostat copy of my letter dated 14th Dec. 1973 to the Director of Anti- Corruption rather than repeat them in these passages.
It is ridiculous that on the one hand an informant reporting on crimes and corruption gets persecuted while on the other details of his reports have been revealed to the racketeers and suspects, who in turn sent their agents to contact the victim in an
$