The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal was asked in May in a high-profile corruption appeal to quash the convictions of four defendants – former joint chairman of Sun Hung Kai Properties Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong, former government chief secretary…
The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal was asked in May in a high-profile corruption appeal to quash the convictions of four defendants – former joint chairman of Sun Hung Kai Properties Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong, former government chief secretary Rafael Hui Si-yan, former Sun Hung Kai executive director Thomas Chan Kui-yuen and former stock exchange official Francis Kwan Hung-sang. The appeal centred on one of the charges, a joint count of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office, concerning HK$8.5 million Kwok offered to Hui shortly before he took office in 2005 through Chan and Kwan. The prosecutors, during a 131-day trial in 2014, were never able to established anything specific Hui did in favour of Sun Hung Kai. Instead, they argued the HK$8.5 million was a sweetener to secure his favourable disposition towards the company. Five top judges were asked to decide whether this “favourable disposition” was a strong enough criminal element by the standards of law. on Wednesday. The court considered the law on misconduct in public office and bribery in Hong Kong. Ever since the first Hong Kong legislation on bribery in 1898, the essence of an advantage being corrupt was its tendency to obtain improper influence or secure a disloyal inclination. Subsequent legislative development has widened the anti-corruption net without abandoning this concept. A broad range of different acts and omissions can constitute the conduct element of the common law offence of misconduct in public office. There must however be a relationship between the act or omission constituting misconduct and the public office.
