Post: Recently the effectiveness of the ICAC has come under fire in view of the senior staff reshuffle in the Operations Department and the fact that certain cases were hung in the balance for a long time. Can you shed some light on the situation?
Yu: I understand that any senior staff reshuffle in the ICAC will arouse public concerns. But I can assure the public that the Commission strictly follows relevant government rules and regulations as well as procedures in handling personnel matters. Staff changes happen in every organisation. The most important is that under a well-established system, personnel changes should not undermine effectiveness, which is the case with the ICAC. Our colleagues have continued to carry out their anti-corruption duties with the same commitment.
Looking back, the ICAC had weathered many “storms” in its 44-year history, including a major review of our powers in 1994. Those were difficult times. But with every crisis, challenge and criticism, the Commission grew, improved and emerged stronger. We will always keep our minds open and strive to seek improvement in our work.
As for the length of time required for investigations, there are indeed a few factors we need to take into consideration. For one, advancement in technology and the use of sophisticated banking systems have made corruption investigations more difficult than ever. In addition, corruption has become borderless. Interviewing witnesses and tracing crime proceeds may involve travelling to far away countries and places. All these have made corruption investigations more difficult and time consuming.
I hope members of the public will appreciate that bound by our pledge to confidentiality and Section 30 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, we may not be able to disclose details of an investigation as they demand. However, they need not worry as the investigative work of the ICAC is subject to a stringent mechanism of checks and balances which ensure that all cases are properly pursued.
Post: Can you tell us more about the ICAC’s checks and balances?
Yu: The work of the ICAC is steered by four advisory committees comprising prominent citizens appointed by the Chief Executive. Of them, the Operations Review Committee (ORC) is responsible for scrutinising the investigative work of the Operations Department.
Apart from four Ex-officio Members, other Members, who are appointed by the Chief Executive, come from various sectors and different background. Members of the ORC can question and express their opinions on the cases put before them. Pursuant to the ORC’s terms of reference, they jointly scrutinise all the investigations of the ICAC, free from interference or hindrance.
As far as I know, an advisory committee of this nature is rare, if not unique, among our overseas counterparts. Other than the ORC, the Department of Justice provides legal advice in the course of investigations. They also decide whether a case should go to court. Last but not least, the ICAC is also closely monitored by the Legislative Council and the mass media.
Previous Page
Back to Home
Previous Issue
