Chapter 2
Background information
Background information
In 2016, the drainage engineering company in question was awarded by its parent company a government drainage project in the South Kowloon district. The defendant of Indian descent worked as a driver and worker in the engineering company.
While works were carried out, a lot of manpower was needed for the disposal of waste, including the removal of filthy construction waste from construction sites. However, there was often a manpower shortage as most local workers were reluctant to take up such low-wage jobs.
Taking advantage of his knowledge of Cantonese, the defendant initially working as a driver began to refer his South Asian clansmen to do the jobs. The engineering company also placed increasing reliance on him as a communication bridge and even assigned him to work as foreman to oversee other South Asian workers at construction sites.
The first complainant first met the foreman on 4 April 2016. The latter solicited HK$3,000 from him as a reward for assisting him to get a job at a construction site.
At that time workers were paid at a daily wage of HK$560. Though the engineering company prohibited its employees from accepting any illegal rewards, such as referral fees or rebates, the defendant had been soliciting money from the workers for the job referrals.
Soon after the first complainant started his work on 9 April, the defendant began to ask him for a referral fee. He gave the defendant HK$1,000 in cash and said that the remaining amount would be paid upon receipt of the wages.
The second complainant, who started working at the construction site in June the same year, was also asked for a referral fee by the foreman on 4 June. However, with the excuse of not having enough ready cash every time when asked, he had never paid any referral fee.
When the first complainant learnt from fellow construction workers that he did not necessarily have to pay a referral fee, he got very furious and refused to pay the fees anymore. He even got into a heated argument with the foreman and ended up in a big fight.
So infuriated by the foreman’s exploitation, when the first complainant happened to see an ICAC poster on the street encouraging people to report corruption, he decided to disclose the case. Together with the second complainant, they then went to an ICAC regional office to make a report about the corrupt practices in the construction industry.
Q: Are non-anonymous complaints more effectively dealt with than anonymous ones?
A: Complainants are encouraged to make non-anonymous corruption reports so that the ICAC can get hold of more detailed and accurate information which is crucial to effective follow-up action and investigation. The over 70% of non-anonymous reports made in recent years has greatly increased the chance of making further probe. Among the anonymous corruption reports where complainants cannot be reached for more information, only around 10% can be followed up. However, the ICAC spares no efforts to searching clues from different sources.
Q: Will I be charged with making a false accusation if the evidence provided may not be entirely accurate when I lodge a complaint?
A: No. Failure to provide full evidence while lodging a complaint does not mean making a false accusation. A person makes a false accusation when the statement or accusation made to the ICAC is knowingly to be false. Such act may constitute a breach of section 13B of the ICAC Ordinance.
Q: Is the complainant required to testify in court?
A: Under normal circumstances, the complainant may be summoned as a witness to testify in court if his/her evidence can help find out the truth in future hearings.
Q: Will the identity of the complainant be disclosed during investigation?
A: The ICAC has stringent established procedures and measures to keep the identity of the complainant and information relating to the complaint in strict confidence. Only the case officer or designated ICAC officers are allowed to gain access to the information on a “need-to-know” principle.
Q: Can the complainant tell other people about the complaint lodged with the ICAC?
A: No. Any person, including the complainant, who discloses details of an investigation or the identity of the subject of an investigation to other people without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, shall be guilty of an offence under section 30 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).
Any person coming across corruption should make a report to the ICAC by phone or mail, or visit the ICAC Report Centre or any regional office in person.
Full evidence is not required when lodging a complaint. Complainants only need to state the known facts of the incident of alleged corruption, and the information provided will be collected by the ICAC for follow-up.
For details:https://www.icac.org.hk/en/rc/guide/index.html