TNAG-0812-FCO40-1017-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-Hong-Kong-1978 — Page 1

on 11th July 1978

RUSHY

Mr. Rushford Any Commit's"?

Rimal Styl

12/ni

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

W

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

PREVENTION OF BRIBERY (AMENDMENT) BILL 1978

Annexed for the consideration of Honourable Members is the Prevention of Bribery (Amendment) Bill 1978.

Background

Sooms

Scnsible to

Me

ARP

13.7

2

Section 10 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (Chapter 201) makes it an offence for a person who is, or has been a Crown servant, to maintain a standard of living not com- mensurate with, or possess property disproportionate to, his official emoluments. Where a prosecution is instituted, the prosecution have to prove that the Crown servant is or has been maintaining a high standard of living, or possesses or has possessed pecuniary resources or property, disproportionate to his official emoluments. If this is done, the burden will then be on the accused to satisfy the court that he has a satisfactory explanation as to how he has been able to live beyond his official means or as to how he came by such assets.

3

The first step in any section 10 case is for the prosecution to quantify the accused's official emoluments, which can then be contrasted with a figure for the accused's property and pecuniary resources. Under the law of evidence, the prose- cution should call witnesses to testify, from their own knowledge, as to the amount of official emoluments received by the accused throughout the whole of his Government service to the date of the charge. But in most section 10 cases, the accused has been a Crown servant for very many years and, not infrequently, in the early part of his service his emoluments were paid in cash. In these circumstances, it is virtually impossible to call a witness to give the required testimony. Hitherto, this failure to produce witness has not hindered prosecutions, because neither the court nor the defence have required strict proof of official emoluments and have been content to allow the prosecution to prove this element of their case either by producing documentary evidence or by calling witnesses whose evidence was derived from documentary sources rather than personal knowledge. Also, in several cases the total amount of official emoluments received has been formally agreed between the prosecution and the defence.