Account clerk admits disclosing identity of person under ICAC probe
2016-9-8
An account clerk, charged by the ICAC, today (Thursday) admitted at the Eastern Magistracy that on three occasions, he had disclosed to others that his elder brother was the subject of an ICAC investigation.
Poon Hoi-kan, 39, pleaded guilty to three counts of disclosing the identity of a person being investigated, contrary to Section 30(1)(b) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).
Magistrate Mr Jason Wan Siu-ming adjourned the case to September 22 this year for sentence, pending a community service order report. The defendant was remanded in the custody of the Correctional Services Department.
The court heard that at the material time, the defendant had a family dispute with his elder brother, an employee of an office products company in Hong Kong.
Acting on the defendant’s instruction, his wife lodged a corruption complaint with the ICAC against the elder brother on August 5, 2015.
Five days later, the defendant’s wife attended an interview at the ICAC headquarters and gave a detailed account of the complaint learnt from her husband in a witness statement.
After the interview, the defendant’s wife was given a photocopy of her witness statement, and warned that any disclosure of the ICAC investigation could constitute an offence under Section 30 of the POBO.
The defendant later photocopied the witness statement, and created an edited version by concealing the particulars of her wife and interviewing officers.
The court heard that on October 5, 2015, a director of the office products company in Hong Kong received an anonymous letter from the defendant. Enclosed in the letter was the edited witness statement, which revealed the corruption complaint and the elder brother being a subject of the ICAC investigation.
On October 9, 2015, the defendant sent the edited witness statement to 39 e-mail addresses belonging to staff members of the office products company in Hong Kong, its associated company in the United States; and another document management consultancy company in Hong Kong, a former employer of his elder brother.
On October 10, 2015, the defendant sent another e-mail to the same 39 e-mail addresses, with the edited witness statement attached to it. The staff members concerned received the e-mail, which contained the identical contents, the court was told.
The prosecution was today represented by ICAC officer Jeanne Lam.
Poon Hoi-kan, 39, pleaded guilty to three counts of disclosing the identity of a person being investigated, contrary to Section 30(1)(b) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).
Magistrate Mr Jason Wan Siu-ming adjourned the case to September 22 this year for sentence, pending a community service order report. The defendant was remanded in the custody of the Correctional Services Department.
The court heard that at the material time, the defendant had a family dispute with his elder brother, an employee of an office products company in Hong Kong.
Acting on the defendant’s instruction, his wife lodged a corruption complaint with the ICAC against the elder brother on August 5, 2015.
Five days later, the defendant’s wife attended an interview at the ICAC headquarters and gave a detailed account of the complaint learnt from her husband in a witness statement.
After the interview, the defendant’s wife was given a photocopy of her witness statement, and warned that any disclosure of the ICAC investigation could constitute an offence under Section 30 of the POBO.
The defendant later photocopied the witness statement, and created an edited version by concealing the particulars of her wife and interviewing officers.
The court heard that on October 5, 2015, a director of the office products company in Hong Kong received an anonymous letter from the defendant. Enclosed in the letter was the edited witness statement, which revealed the corruption complaint and the elder brother being a subject of the ICAC investigation.
On October 9, 2015, the defendant sent the edited witness statement to 39 e-mail addresses belonging to staff members of the office products company in Hong Kong, its associated company in the United States; and another document management consultancy company in Hong Kong, a former employer of his elder brother.
On October 10, 2015, the defendant sent another e-mail to the same 39 e-mail addresses, with the edited witness statement attached to it. The staff members concerned received the e-mail, which contained the identical contents, the court was told.
The prosecution was today represented by ICAC officer Jeanne Lam.