TNAG-0489-FCO40-554-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-Hong-Kong-police-an-1974 — Page 111

6

>

16.

The reply of the District Commissioner. New Territories confirmed previous findings and reported that Mr. LUI Sung's buildings, including a kitchen, totalled 435 sq.ft. in floor area, i.e. the position was that Mr. LUI Sung had a house which had not been demolished (but in the roof of which holes had allegedly been bored but this had never been proved) and a kitchen which Mr. LUI had unlawfully re-erected (paragraph 5 above) after the original structure had been demolished on the 23rd March 1972. The District Commissioner, New Territories confirmed that prior to the demolition of the original kitchen he had received written notice that unless the original kitchen could be shown to be legal it would be demolished after two days; in fact ten days elapsed before demolition.

17.

Mrs. Elliott's letter of the 20th October 1973 said that Mr. LUI's house had been demolished. This is incorrect in that it was the kitchen which had been demolished. Mrs. Elliott said that Mr. LUI wished to have the hut rebuilt by Government to its previous specification. Mr. LUI. had, however, already rebuilt the kitchen, as discovered by District Office staff on the 6th October 1972.

18.

On the 13th December 1973 Mrs. Elliott was informed, in reply to her letter of the 20th Cctober 1973, that Mr. LUI's case had been exhaustively investigated in the past and that it would not be possible to meet Mr. LUI's requests as detailed in paragraph 12 above.

19.

With regard to paragraph 4 of the telegram No. 86 of 23/1, irs. Elliott sent only one reminder.

20.

With regard to paragraph 5 of the telegram No. 96 of 23/1 the allegations made by Mr. LUI Sung as to the theft of $850 and that Mr. LEE had asked for a bribe had been thoroughly investigated in the past and had not been proved. Mr. LUI Sung had been informed of this in the letter signed on behalf of the Colonial Secretary dated 1st Febrary 1973. The hut had not been demolished but the kitchen had. Mr. Mortimer's letter did not state that the hut had been demolished because it was slightly too large. There is no explanation as to why the kitchen was demolished in the absence of the parents.

¿

/21.