Field Officer of AFCD charged by ICAC with using false documents and perversion over stray dog cases
2021-12-1
A Field Officer II of the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) was charged by the ICAC today (December 1) for allegedly using false internal documents in relation to four stray dog cases to mislead the department and perverting the course of public justice.
The ICAC investigation arose from a corruption complaint. Upon completion of the investigation, the ICAC sought legal advice from the Department of Justice, which advised charges be laid against the Field Officer II.
Li Kai-tik, 48, faces a total of 12 charges – eight of agent using a document with intent to deceive his principal, contrary to Section 9(3) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance; and four of doing an act tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice, contrary to Common Law.
The defendant was released on ICAC bail, pending his appearance in the Kowloon City Magistrates’ Courts on Friday (December 3) for plea.
The above alleged offences took place between June 26, 2018 and February 27, 2019. At the material time, the defendant was a Field Officer II of the AFCD posted to the Kowloon Animal Management Centre (the Centre).
Under the Rabies Ordinance, it is an offence for a dog keeper if his or her dog is not on a leash or under control in a public place (the offence). The Centre was responsible for handling stray dogs and the relevant criminal investigations on possible prosecutions against dog keepers for the offence. Staff of the Centre who conducted the relevant investigations were required to fill in a form, namely entitled “Information for Possible Prosecution (for stray dogs)” (Prosecution Form).
When a person handed in a stray dog to the Centre, he or she was required to fill in a form, namely “Record for Handing in Stray Animal(s)” (Animal Form), and to indicate if he or she was willing to testify in court against the dog keepers.
Eight of the charges allege that the defendant, with intent to deceive his principal, used four Animal Forms and four Prosecution Forms, which contained false or erroneous statements that four persons who handed in four stray dogs to the Centre were unwilling to testify in court as prosecution witnesses, to mislead the AFCD.
The remaining charges allege that the defendant, with intent to pervert the course of public justice, did an act or a series of acts which had a tendency to pervert the course of public justice.
It is alleged that the defendant has falsely represented to two supervisors that the above four persons were unwilling to be the prosecution witnesses in the aforesaid stray dog cases; and made recommendations of no prosecution against the dog keepers in those cases to the supervisors.
The AFCD has rendered full assistance to the ICAC during its investigation into the case.
The ICAC investigation arose from a corruption complaint. Upon completion of the investigation, the ICAC sought legal advice from the Department of Justice, which advised charges be laid against the Field Officer II.
Li Kai-tik, 48, faces a total of 12 charges – eight of agent using a document with intent to deceive his principal, contrary to Section 9(3) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance; and four of doing an act tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice, contrary to Common Law.
The defendant was released on ICAC bail, pending his appearance in the Kowloon City Magistrates’ Courts on Friday (December 3) for plea.
The above alleged offences took place between June 26, 2018 and February 27, 2019. At the material time, the defendant was a Field Officer II of the AFCD posted to the Kowloon Animal Management Centre (the Centre).
Under the Rabies Ordinance, it is an offence for a dog keeper if his or her dog is not on a leash or under control in a public place (the offence). The Centre was responsible for handling stray dogs and the relevant criminal investigations on possible prosecutions against dog keepers for the offence. Staff of the Centre who conducted the relevant investigations were required to fill in a form, namely entitled “Information for Possible Prosecution (for stray dogs)” (Prosecution Form).
When a person handed in a stray dog to the Centre, he or she was required to fill in a form, namely “Record for Handing in Stray Animal(s)” (Animal Form), and to indicate if he or she was willing to testify in court against the dog keepers.
Eight of the charges allege that the defendant, with intent to deceive his principal, used four Animal Forms and four Prosecution Forms, which contained false or erroneous statements that four persons who handed in four stray dogs to the Centre were unwilling to testify in court as prosecution witnesses, to mislead the AFCD.
The remaining charges allege that the defendant, with intent to pervert the course of public justice, did an act or a series of acts which had a tendency to pervert the course of public justice.
It is alleged that the defendant has falsely represented to two supervisors that the above four persons were unwilling to be the prosecution witnesses in the aforesaid stray dog cases; and made recommendations of no prosecution against the dog keepers in those cases to the supervisors.
The AFCD has rendered full assistance to the ICAC during its investigation into the case.