TNAG-0990-FCO40-1209-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-Hong-Kong-1980 — Page 8

It is vital for the Commission to have the confidence of the public that, when they make complaints or give information to it, their identity will not be disclosed to outsiders without their consent. From the inception of the Commission, the confidentiality of reports made to the Commission has been stressed. The Commission also takes steps to protect the identity of complainants and informants for as long as they wish. However, legal advice has been given that an application to a court by a person against whom an allegation had been made could result in the Commission being compelled to disclose the identity of an informer.

31

There is now an encouraging increase in the percentage of identifiable complaints to the Commission. An identifiable complainant is obviously preferable to an anonymous complainant. It would therefore be unfortunate if the trend towards identifiable complainants for the Commission was reversed because some well publicised care revealed that the identity of complainants had to be disclosed under the law as it now stands. To prevent this, clause 12 empowers the Commission to protect the identity of its complainants and informants, and to prevent that identity being revealed against the wishes of the complainant or informer. There is a precedent for such protection in section 57 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance,

Time limit for bringing a prosecution against certain summary offences

32

After consideration of the implications of section 89 of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance, and section 26 of the Magistrates Ordinance, Chapter 227, in relation to the wording of certain sections creating offences under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (and later in the Independent Commission Against Corruption Ordinance), it appears that certain offences are triable only summarily and, therefore, are subject to the limitation of 6 months on the institution of a prosecution from the time that the offence occurred. There are 11 sections in the principal Ordinance creating offences which are triable only summarily, and experience of the time which often elapses before they come to light, together with the nature of some of those offences, makes it essential to extend the time limit.

33

Clause 13 provides for the time limits in respect of six sections (sections 3, 14(4), 14(5), 14(A)5, 14C(6) and 33A) of the Ordinance to be extended to 3 years for the initiation of a prosecution after the date on which the offence was committed, and of four sections (sections 13(3), 13(4), 29 and 30(1)) to be extended to one year. Time limits for two sections (sections 16(2) and 17(3)) will remain at 6 months.

CONFIDENTIAL