NOTE FOR THE FILE
CONFIDENTIAL
NIUL 026
:... NICK 380/2
Action on
??
HONG KONG : MEETING WITH THE HONG KONG ATTORNEY-GENERAL
1.
Mr John Hobley, the Attorney-General in Hong Kong, called on the department on 24 March at the start of leave in this country. The following points emerged from the discussion that Mr Duffy and I had with him.
ICAC
2. Mr Hobley said that he had seen Mr Stewart's letter of 28 February and the Chief Secretary's reply in Hong Kong telegram No 245. The question of the appointment of some kind of review body or Ombudsman to deal with public complaints about the administrative activities of the ICAC was for discussion with Mr Stewart during his present visit but Mr Hobley said his own view was that it was not a starter. On a related front the Government Secretariat had been considering whether a new procedure might be established for handling complaints against the police, eg a body similar to the ICAC's own Target Operations Committee. The Chief Secretary had been on the point of writing to the Commissioner of Folice about this when Mr Stewart's letter had arrived but had suspended his letter pending discussion with Mr Stewart. Mr Hobley remarked that he expected a hostile reaction from the police to the suggestion on which the Secretariat had been working.
3. Mr Hobley said that the Hong Kong Government could also be expected to resist the appointment, if it should be suggested, of an Ombudsman to deal with public complaints against all branches of the administration. UMLICO already performed this role, in effect, and unless the Unofficial Members themselves proposed a change there should be none. I pointed out that this argument would not carry much weight in the office for it would be extremely unlikely that UMLICO would ask for the creation of a body which would diminish their present powers.
Mr Hobley said that Mr Cater's speech earlier this year to the Hong Kong kotary Club about the work of the ICAC had not been well received by the judiciary (nor, of course, by the police). The judges were super-sensitive to suggestions that they should impose stiffer sentences and would not be prepared to take notice of what a non-legal authority such as the Commissioner of the ICAC had to say on the matter. Mr Hobley said that his own attempt about 18 months ago to encourage the judiciary to impose stiffer sentences had not been taken kindly. Even the Governor himself would find it difficult to do anything; both the Chief Justice and Mr Justice Huggins were highly resistant.
5. Mr Hobley mentioned that the Chinese Manufacturers Association and the Chinese Chamber of Commerce had made written representation a few months ago about the ICAC's efforts to root out "commissions" in the business world. A letter had been sent to these organisations explaining the Government's position. It was agreed that it would be
CER
/useful