./6
6.
7.(a)
(商)廠
C. M. A.
Since "irregularities" within the private sector do not fall within the intended meaning of "corruption", the provision of Section 24 of the Ordinance, placing the onus of proof of
(inter alia) the agent's authority on the payer, should not apply, and Section 9(2) should be amended. It places an intolerable, and in most cases impossible, burden on the Hong Kong businessmen especially those dealing with overseas "principals".
Since 1948 the Government has not invoked the Prevention of Corruption Ordinance to prosecute employees for irregularities within the private
sector.
When the Ordinance was amended in 1971 and became the present Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, the great majority of Hong Kong citizens was under the impression that it was applicable only to civil servants. Indeed the very name for I.C.A.C. in Chinese, chosen by the Government was the clearest indication to the public that that was what was intended and that that was what would happen.
At the same time, it has generally been recognised that most commissions are a lawful means of promoting business. Now that the Ordinance forbids payment or receipt of any commissions and has designated all of them as illegal, the business community, including everyone under employ, is at a loss as to what to do: on the one hand, no one would wish to risk giving legitimate and profit-diminishing commissions and thus break the law: on the other hand no one can doggedly abide by such law and starve.
The choice is agonising to would-be law abiding subjects and citizens and is worrying indeed.