Supplementary to question No. 12 in the
egislative Council on 20 November 1985
Mr. LEE Yu-tai : Sir, surely given the power of inspectors under the Companies
Ordinance to make interim reports which would be available to the prosecution
would it have been more prudent to appoint them under
the Companies Ordinance ?
The Financial Secretary : Sir, that there is specific power under the Companies
Ordinance to make interim reports does not mean to say that interim reports cannot
be given by the inspectors appointed under the Securities Ordinance. In fact this
is exactly what has happened and there had been a series of interim reports. The
problem is not actually with the reports; it is that we cannot make the reports
available to the prosecution because of undertakings given by the inspectors with
the consent of the Securities Commission to the accused in the Carrian trial in
order that they would give evidence to the inspectors before the conclusion of that
trial.
Mr. David Li :
Ge
Sir, in view of the high cost of the inspectors appointed and the
fact that their investigation is often a duplication of that of other investigative
departments and of a limited use, would the Government consider amending the Securities Ordinance and the Companies Ordinance to give the inspectors appointed thereunder greater power ?
The Financial Secretary : - Once the report of the inspectors is available to the
Securities Commission which is of course a distinctive body of citizens and under the
chairmanship of the Retired Judge of the Court of Appeal, they will of course see if there are any messages to be learnt from the inspectors' conclusions and they
will so advise the Government.
Page 150Page 151