TNAG-1995-FCO40-2842-Drug-trafficking-in-Hong-Kong-1989 — Page 74

recipients of realisable gifts, and other third party interests.

Clause 15 empowers the High Court, if it is satisfied on the

defendant's application that the realisable property is inadequate to

pay the amount of the confiscation order, to reduce both the amount

of the confiscation order and the term of imprisonment in default.

Clause 16 deals with a situation where proceedings at the same time

for a confiscation order and a bankruptcy order may give rise to

competing interests. The situation is resolved by reference to the

respective times of making of the various orders. Clause 17 makes

similar provision for resolving competing interests where a company

holding realisable property is to be wound up. Clause 18 protects

receivers and liquidators exercising functions under the Bankruptcy

Ordinance (Cap. 6) and Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32) from loss or

damage resulting from seizure or disposal of realisable property

subject to a restraint order, unless the loss or damage was due to

negligence. The clause further provides for payment of remuneration

and expenses in connection with the property or its seizure and

disposal. Clause 19 makes supplementary provision in respect of the

liability and remuneration of a receiver appointed under the Bill.

5. Part IV concerns powers relating to investigations into

drug trafficking for the purposes of the Bill. Clause 20 empowers

the High Court to make a discovery order against a person reasonably

suspected of having carried on or benefited from drug trafficking.

The order may require the suspected person to furnish a statement

specifying all property held by him or his agents and trustees and

all gifts made by him within the previous 6 years. The purpose of

such an order is to assist the investigating authorities in

determining whether restraint or charging orders will be sought. It