TNAG-1704-FCO40-2376-Crime-and-sentencing-in-Hong-Kong-various-ordinances-1988 — Page 78

CHAPTER 9

ន

Caracare pa on Entis file (Last) Crines Thune

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

14/1

9.1 We list below, for ease of reference, our recommendations from chapters 2 to 8. All these recommendations apply to complex commercial crimes only, except for those marked by an asterisk (*).

9.2 Recommendations requiring legislation are indicated with a dagger (†). All other roommendations are administrative.

RECEIVED!

REGISTRY

16 JAN 1987

ALGE Y

Action Taken

1.

DESI

FFICER

PA

INDEX

*(1) The Government should discuss with the Hong Kong Society of Accountants and other interested parties ways to facilitate the reporting by accountants of suspected fraud [paragraph 2.34].

*†(2) Inspectors appointed by the Financial Secretary under sections 142 or 143 of the Companies Ordinance should be put under an obligation to report suspected fraud as soon as possible [paragraph 2.34].

Yout

(3) The police should review their present arrangements for international co- operation and consider ways in which these can be improved [paragraph 2.36].

*+(4) The Government should review and rationalize the provisions of the Companies Ordinance relating to investigation of companies and the examination of company papers, and should consider the possibility of granting to the police powers similar to those of the Financial Secretary under section 152A of that Ordinance [paragraph 2.39].

(5) Prosecution counsel should continue to be appointed at an early stage in the investigation and should co-operate actively with the investigating officers involved in the case [paragraph 2.40].

(6) The leading prosecution counsel should be nominated Case Controller from the inception of the case, with the responsibilities set out in the text [paragraph 2.43].

*(7) The Government should, through its normal administrative machinery, monitor

the implementation of the recommendations of this Report [paragraph 2.44].

†(8) Full committal proceedings should be abolished [paragraphs 3.14–3.16].1

+(9) The defence should have the right, after a case has been transferred to the jurisdiction of the High Court, to apply for a discharge on the grounds of no prima facie case to answer. Such a discharge should be equivalent to acquittal at trial [paragraph 3.15].1

†(10) An application on the grounds of no prima facie case to answer should be held in

open court but subject to reporting restrictions [paragraph 3.15].1

†(11) The defence should be allowed, under certain circumstances and at the discretion of the judge, to cross-examine prosecution witnesses at the hearing of the application for discharge [paragraph 3.15].1

One member of the Committee did not support these recommendations: see Part 2, minutes of meetings on 27 May 1986, paragraphs 3.4 and 3.10; 7 June 1986, paragraph 1.5; 8 July 1986, paragraph 3.2; 12 July 1986, paragraph 1.1(ƒ); and 23 July 1986, paragraph 1.2.

60