bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

hooksAmpRedirectArticle

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

paywallTypes

createdDate

publishedDate

urlAlias

moreOnThisArticles

sponsorType

commentCount

authorLocations

authors

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

articleSpeeches

socialHeadline

headline

images

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

sponsor

pdfFiles

seriesReverseOrder

series

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

readingTime

customTimezone

liveContents

THE police protection scheme was yesterday blamed for the silence of a key witness who claimed he was too scared to give evidence in the trial of Emperor tycoon Albert Yeung Sau-shing.

  Michael Lam Yih-jiun's memory loss - along with four other witnesses' - led to Yeung's acquittal on charges of intimidation and false imprisonment.

  Yesterday Lam, 31, was told he could face a 12-month jail sentence for his action.

  But his counsel, James Chandler, told Western Court the police's witness protection scheme had failed to remove Lam's 'genuine anxiety' for his safety. He blamed the limited manpower in the police force.

  He said: 'Could you give him a new identity? Of course not. In present Hong Kong, very little could be done to protect a witness who fears future retribution.

     'What could really be done to Lam in future for his giving evidence? There is a real risk.'   He cited the murder of a key witness in an Independent Commission Against Corruption case in Singapore as an example.

   After the witnesses' silence in the trial at the end of May, magistrate Paul Kelly had ruled Yeung, 50, had no case to answer.

  As well as criminal intimidation and false imprisonment, Yeung was accused of threatening to break Lam's leg.

   Lam, a former branch president of Emperor International Exchange, had claimed he had a heart condition and was too frightened to recollect his alleged imprisonment at the hands of Yeung in December last year. He was later declared a hostile witness.

  The tycoon faces trial later this year for allegedly attempting to persuade Mr Lam not to give evidence. He denies the allegation.

   Yesterday the court was told Lam had been given police protection for two days after the alleged imprisonment and for the trial's first two days.

   Then he turned down the offer of further protection.

   Mr Chandler argued the protection given to Lam was not enough to relieve his concerns over his security in this 'violent city'.

  Mr Chandler said to send Lam to prison in these circumstances would be a contravention of the Bill of Rights. This is the first time this legislation has been challenged in this way.

  But Mr Kelly yesterday said he disbelieved Lam's memory loss.

  'I'm sure your allegation of being unable to recall the evidence is not true. I can never imagine threats and violence could amount to a just cause for refusing to answer questions put to you.'     According to the Magistracy Ordinance, Lam could face a year's jail or a fine of up to $5,000.

    However, Mr Chandler argued any prison terms imposed on the witness would contradict the Bill of Rights.

       The case was adjourned to July 21 for mention and to fix a date for legal argument.

    Lam was yesterday accompanied to court by his fiancee, television actress Cecilia Yiu Ching-ching, and another witness in the May trial, Vincent Wai Pui-cheong.



Poor protection blamed for witness silence