TNAG-0405-FCO40-451-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 142

as they did anywhere.

The Anti-Corruption

occur,

Branch carried out investigations on a routine

basis. It was possible that the constitution

of the Branch might be altered in order to avoid

a situation where policemen of the same force

were investigating conduct of their colleagues.

A separate body might be possible, but Mr Royle

could give no assurance at this stage.

3. Mr Ellis repeated that a Hong Kong Government

inquiry was inadequate. In 1965 he himself had

not been called, although he would have been a

principa witness. Mr Royle said that the

Commission of Inquiry in 1965 would have had all

the papers and would not therefore necessarily love

need to see everyone concerned. Mr Ellis said

that in December 1965 he had written to Mrs Eirene

at

White of the Colonial Office, but had never had

a reply. Mr Royle emphasised that in the 1965

inquiry the rules of procedure had been duly

followed. Mr Ellis, however, contended that full

replies had not been taken down. He also mentioned

that between 1958 and 1962 he knew that Hong Kong

Folice Inspectors stationed on the Macao wharf had

been taking bribes; one of them, a Mr Farran, had

admitted this to him himself. Mr Royle said that

the Hong Kong Government were taking action against

any cases of corruption which might occur. Any

expatriate would be severely dealt with if he was

found to be engaged in corrupt practices. At the

same time training and education of the Police Force

were being increased. Mr Ellis said that he had on

/one

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN