The ICAC respects the Court of Appeal's (the Court) judgment handed down this morning, which considered that the ICAC had "acted entirely lawfully in seeking the search warrants" and that the issuing of the search warrants was "entirely justified".

According to the Court's judgment handed down by the Chief Judge of High Court, Mr Justice Geoffrey Ma, the Court of Appeal believed that the ICAC "did no more and no less than they were entitled by law to do."

The Commission earlier lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal in regard to the decision of Mr Justice Michael Hartmann of the Court of First Instance to set aside the search warrants issued by the High Court, following an appeal by Sing Tao Limited and o ne of its reporters.

Vice President Mr Justice Michael Stuart-Moore and Mr Justice Frank Stock, who heard the appeal together with Mr Justice Ma, agreed with the judgment of the Chief Judge.

While affirming the legality of the application for the warrants by the ICAC, the Court also found the issuing of search warrants entirely justified as the case involved was "a serious one".

The Court pointed out that the case had revealed "an extremely troubling scenario whereby the well-being or life of the participant in a witness protection programme may have been put at risk and the integrity of the programme potentially undermined."

Meanwhile, the Court also noted that Part XII of the Interpretation and General Clauses Ordinance contained important safeguards to protect the basic freedom of the press.

The judgment said the ICAC was not empowered by any law to exercise any sort of arbitrary power to effect search and seizure of journalistic material.

"A search warrant must first be obtained from a judge, who may only grant it upon certain identified, stringent requirements being fulfilled as well as it being in the public interest to issue one," the judgment said.

Meanwhile, the Court also believed that the present case involved a balancing exercise between the freedom of the press and the rights and interests of other persons or society as a whole.

An ICAC spokesman said, "The Commission fully appreciates the sensitivity of the matter, and would always exercise utmost caution in considering any application for search warrants in relation to journalistic materials."

According to the judgment, the Court considered itself having no jurisdiction to hear the appeal, based on relevant statutory provisions and the High Court Rules.

However, it also remarked that should it possess the necessary jurisdiction, the appeal would have been allowed with costs.

The ICAC spokesman said the Court nonetheless spelt out its views on the exercising of powers by law enforcement agencies on the search and seizure of journalistic materials.

"The ICAC would study the judgment in further details in consultation with the Department of Justice, and take into account the Court's views in its future law enforcement work," the spokesman added.

"The rule of law and free flow of information are cornerstones of our society," the ICAC spokesman said, stressing that the ICAC respects press freedom, and appreciates its importance to the overall interest of Hong Kong.

"In addition to efforts of the ICAC and a community supportive of the anti-corruption cause, the news media has been playing a pivotal role in maintaining Hong Kong as one of the cleanest metropolitan cities by exposing social wrongs and injustice."

The spokesman also added that the ICAC would take stock of the experiences in this case, and step up exchanges with the news media to strengthen mutual trust and understanding.