Head of snooping watchdog hits out at law enforcers
The head of Hong Kong's covert-surveillance watchdog accused some law enforcement officers of being rebellious and unused to supervision by a third party, in his yearly round-up yesterday.
Last week, 11 irregularities with law enforcement agencies' covert operations were disclosed, in the 2008 annual report by Mr Justice Woo Kwok-hing, the commissioner on interception of communications and surveillance, in which he criticised the Independent Commission Against Corruption for committing two serious breaches.
Yesterday, ICAC Commissioner Timothy Tong Hin-ming apologised for officers' negligence, saying that 15 officers had faced disciplinary action for breaching the covert-surveillance ordinance last year. In March, he expressed regret about below-par performances by four officers - including an assistant director - in wiretapping operations involving lawyer-client conversations
Woo said that while non-compliance with the Interception of Communications and Surveillance Ordinance persisted three years after the law was introduced, some officers were reluctant to be supervised on covert operations. 'I feel some officers are unused to being put under the supervision of others out of their departments,' he said. 'They may also share some kind of rebellious mentality, as they reckon their jobs should target criminals.'
In one case in the report, Woo said graft-busters had transposed the numbers in a wire-tapping operation, resulting in the interception of an innocent person's telephone calls for a few days. Warnings were given to a chief investigator who caused the mistake and to a senior investigator. Two other investigators were also given 'advice'.
However, Woo said the punishments were unfair. 'It gives the impression that the department is magnifying the culpability of the junior while playing down the mistakes committed by the superior.'
The ICAC yesterday stuck to its view that the disciplinary actions were appropriate, saying that the senior investigator was the person in charge of the case and he should have noticed the error well beforehand.
In another case related to the ICAC, Woo complained that he was given incorrect information concerning an unauthorised tapping of lawyer-client conversations in 2007. He said that he had had to look at the case again, due to the mistakes, and that the extra effort had wasted a lot of his time.
A separate case in the report accused an officer from an unnamed agency of being 'arrogant, presumptuous and bordering on recalcitrance' when Woo asked for interception records.
The officer, responsible for handling interception documents, told Woo that the relevant records had not been retained. The officer was later moved to another position under the department.
Lawmaker James To Kun-sun said law enforcement officers were used to exercising their powers without scrutiny, and such mindsets and behaviour had been reflected by the irregularities in the report.
Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee Siu-kwong said that the government accepted the criticisms in Woo's annual report. He said a review of the ordinance was under way and would be discussed in the legislature by the middle of next year.
