The journalistic principle of protecting an anonymous source was sacrificed in an attempt to avoid prosecution, the Court of Appeal heard yesterday.
Barrister Guy Reynolds told the court that the South China Morning Post named its anonymous source to dodge criminal charges after it 'clearly breached' witness protection laws.
He argued that the newspaper handed prominent barrister Kevin Egan over to authorities in exchange for immunity from prosecution.
Former reporter Magdalen Chow Yin-ling's 'inconsistent' testimony at Egan's trial might have been padded to 'foist responsibility' on to the barrister, Mr Reynolds told his client's appeal hearing.
Egan was convicted in 2006 of trying to give Chow the name of a woman testifying in a bribery trial. The witness' name appeared in a report in the paper under Chow's byline.
'Both the South China Morning Post and Ms Chow were in grave danger of being prosecuted,' Mr Reynolds told Mr Justice Geoffrey Ma Tao-li, Mr Justice Robert Tang Ching and Mr Justice Alan Wright. 'They had clearly breached the Witness Protection Ordinance.'
Egan, 61, is the first person convicted under laws that prohibit disclosing the identity of people in witness protection. Chow testified that Egan's comments outside a hearing in July 2004 were a clear hint that the woman had joined a witness protection programme.