Supergrass protection unit set up by police
POLICE will form a specialist operational unit dedicated to the full-time well-being of whistle-blowers and supergrasses under a model for witness protection being fine-tuned by the Security Branch and senior police.
Aspects of the model, a slight variation from that proposed last July by Mr Justice Kempster after his Commission of Inquiry into Witness Protection, will almost certainly be unveiled by the Security Branch next week.
Legislative amendments allowing witnesses to change their identity and to give evidence freely in court without being identified are understood to be in the pipeline.
A chief inspector attached to police headquarters has been working full-time with a small team on the operational details of the unit, which will be staffed and run largely by police.
The Security Branch, which lacks the expertise and manpower to run such a unit, will concern itself with funding and policy co-ordination, especially when witnesses for other government departments are involved.
The Secretary for Security, Alistair Asprey, is expected to reveal for the first time next week details of the Government's preferred model and how it will be implemented.
A Security Branch proposal was put before Executive Councillors for their consideration and approval on Tuesday.
But a complete witness protection programme will not be in place for a while because some of the more sensitive aspects, including witness relocations overseas and identity changes, are still being worked out.
''For [overseas relocation] to be done we would have to have the agreement of other countries - and under what circumstances would a country agree to bypass their immigration measures to accommodate a witness from Hong Kong,'' said a source close to the planning of the operational unit.
''It's not something you can do at the drop of a hat. Changing someone's identity, job, school and all the rest of it can be done, but it's a horrendous step. Obviously, it will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.'' Police do not have a specialist unit, but have operated round-the-clock protection for witnesses in an ad hoc programme. The Independent Commission Against Corruption has its own system.
Crime-fighters in Hong Kong have described the blueprint for witness protection as one of the most important future developments of the criminal justice system, especially as the Organised and Serious Crimes Bill should encourage more reports and testimony from whistle-blowers fearful of reprisals.
Selling the new programme as a positive and foolproof alternative is vital because police believe many concerns of potential whistle-blowers stem from an apprehension of the unknown rather than any real threat to personal safety.
Fight Crime Committee member Justein Wong Chun welcomed the major role police would play in the future programme.
The committee prepared its own report on witness protection and many of the recommendations were endorsed by Mr Justice Kempster's $6 million inquiry.
''There are more witnesses in the police department than any other department combined,'' Mr Wong said.
He said there should be a code of practice defining the different levels of witness protection and a solid legal framework to support the programme.
