TNAG-0409-FCO40-455-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 128

(1) Is there widespread corruption in the public service in Hong Kong? (2) If so, why?

(3) Why is it so difficult to establish guilt in cases of bribery and corruption?

I shall deal with (1) and (2) together.

Is there widespread corruption in the public service in Hong Kong? If so, why?

85. In attempting to answer these questions, I am reminded of a “note on the pattern of corruption in Hong Kong" dated 16th November 1967 written by Mr. Paul GRACE, at present Commander, Kowloon District. He said:-

"Why is it that the man in the street in Hong Kong can so readily be persuaded to pay officials for facilities which the law says he shall have, whilst the man in the street in Birmingham would not only refuse indignantly to pay but would expect vigorous action against any official who might make such a suggestion?"

86. In attempting to answer that question, it is no good closing our eyes to the facts of history; and I cannot do better than quote the words of a highly-educated Hong Kong Chinese (a lawyer, and a much-respected member of this community) who, in answer to an invitation by me for assistance, wrote to the Commission as follows:-

"Down to near the end of the T'sing Dynasty, the terms 'government' and 'citizen' were unknown in China. There were only the 'Emperor', his 'officials' and the 'subjects' (the 'hundred surnames'). There was no such creature as a 'Government servant'. Anyone appointed to any office was by grace and favour of the Emperor and he was called an 'official'. He owed no duty to those he ruled within his jurisdiction. The same principle applied to the lowliest amongst the subordinates of a mandarin. Such persons might be paid out of the emoluments of the mandarin. If so, he was the mandarin's personal aid or servant. If he was paid out of the revenue, he was an official. This system persisted down to the Nationalist regime, even though lip service was paid to the idea of modern government. Every act done by an official was regarded as a favour; and any omission a dispensation. Payment for such favour or dispensation was taken as a matter of course by a Chinese as a quid pro quo.

Having understood this historical background, it is easy to reach the conclusion that a Chinese in Hong Kong is more ready to pay a bribe, as we understand it, without thinking of any moral issue. Indeed, for the majority of the Chinese in Hong Kong, most of the multifarious regulations and restrictions have no moral at all; and they do not see anything wrong in buying their way out . . . corrup- tion and bribery in Chinese history was not confined to the uneducated. It was rampant amongst the educated who had been appointed to office through Imperial examinations. Even in the T'sing Dynasty appointments to minor public office could be acquired by purchase or bribery. Similarly... corruption in Hong Kong is just as prevalent in the more educated class.”

87. Another highly-educated and much-respected Hong Kong Chinese wrote to the Commission as follows:-

"Public attitude towards corruption is affected by the following factors which exercise considerable

influence in the circumstances of Hong Kong:

(1) A high proportion of the middle-aged or elderly residents came from China as refugees after 1949. In China they lived under the KMT Government which was riddled with corruption. They were conditioned to a style of Chinese Government suffering from the long heritage of dynasties of corrupt and oppressive rule with Government officials wielding unchallenged power. Un- doubtedly, there were many just and clean officials as well. Indeed, some incorruptible historical figures became Chinese legends. However, the image of the Chinese Governments made the people believe that most officials were corrupt. The common Chinese proverb (XT60-** all the crows in the world are black) stemmed from this impression. A clean, fair Government, accountable to the public for its acts, and serving the public as its duty, was certainly the high political ideal advocated by ancient sages and the four traditionally upheld qualities of model officialdom (E-fairness, uprightness, integrity and acumen) all implied a categorical con- demnation of corruption as a heinous crime. However, these ideals were often not fulfilled in practice. Deep-rooted impressions of the KMT regime rotting with corruption have made these immigrants believe, without too much critical examination, that many Hong Kong Government officers, like the Chinese officials they knew, may also be corrupt. This belief in itself breeds corruption because it leads to voluntary bribery by people who consider it normal practice in dealing with Governments.

20

20