TNAG-0405-FCO40-451-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 47

34

have 'blown' surveillance and he could then complain that he was being harassed. We were anxious to do nothing that might prejudice the case.

I explained to the Commissioner of Police why I felt surveillance was wrong and that the law such as it is left us with little to do except await the expiry of the seven-day period he had been given by the Attorney General."

It is easy to criticise those reasons, looking at the

matter in retrospect. One naturally asks oneself now: what good

was the stop list in the case of a police officer of Godber' $

seniority, armed, as he was, with a "red" Civil Aviation permit and his police warrant card? I do not understand reason (a).

Surveillance simply means that the police are observing the

movements of the suspect. He could not legitimately complain

to a court of law that he was being "harassed", provided that

nothing was done which could be said to amount to an obstruction

of his freedom of movement.

As regards the effectiveness of surveillance, that

is an entirely different matter on which, perhaps, I am not

competent to express a view. I accept Fr. Dawson's evidence

that Godber had been an expert instructor in this field and

knew all the "tricks of the trade". I also accept his evidence

that it may be difficult for Chinese surveillance officers to

keep an eye on an expatriate target 24 hours a day in that the

expatriate may frequent buildings into which it would be impossible

for a Chinese police officer to go without making himself obvious.

I also accept the fact that a full surveillance for a week would

involve a very considerable number of officers. Ir. Dawson said

that it might involve as many as 50 officers, having regard to the fact that the "observers" have to be changed frequently **** A.

very considerable amount of man power, especially at the height

of the Fight Violent Crime Campaign.

On the other hand, Godber was a very important target.

He was far more than a suspect. The police attitude was that the

7 days allowed to Godber was simply a waste of time; and I agree

with them. In these circumstances, it seems to me that some

surveillance would have been better than no surveillance at all.