TNAG-0682-FCO40-831-Political-aspects-of-administration-of-justice-in-Hong-Kong-1977 — Page 86

IN 22 COUN 17 Æ

on appeal from the High Court

1976 No. 96 (Criminal).

CECIL JAES MATHEW CUNNINGHAM

BENNO THOMPSON

and

THE QUEEN

Coran: Briggs, J.J., Huggins & Pickering, JJ.A.

Date: 13th July 1976.

JUDGMENT

Appellants

Respondent

兆

Pickering, J.A.:

The two appellants, both formerly superintendents in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force, appeal against their convictions for conspiracy, the original particulars of which were that on divers dates between the months of July 1971 and February 1974 they conspired

with three named station sergeants and with other persons unknown to obstruct the course of public justice in that the five of them should act contrary to their public duty as police officers in relation to the administration of the law. During the course of the trial the names of a further thirteen alleged co-conspirators were added to the Particulars of Offence. The prosecution's allegation was of an agreement for the large scale acceptance of bribes from the operators of gambling stalls and vice establishments in return for immunity

from prosecution.

The first appellant was additionally charged with and found guilty of malting a false statutory declaration contrary to s.36 (a) of the Crimes Ordinance (Cap. 200) and both were charged with neglecting or failing to comply with a 5.14(1)(b) notice contrary to s.14(4)

of the Prevention of Eribery Ordinance (Cap. 201). On that charge

the first appellent ves convicted whereas the second appellant was

acquitted.

It was a ground of appeal thrt e separate trial should have

been held in regard to the conspiracy charge. This was a matter of discretion for the judge and since it appeared that most of

the evidence relied upon in relation to the second charge would be