Time for the ICAC to take stock

"Injustice in the end produces independence," said Voltaire. In 1973, the then governor, Sir Murray MacLehose, told the Legislative Council that good governance in Hong Kong required a dedicated anti-graft body, outside of the police force, noting that "clearly the public would have more confidence in a unit that is entirely independent".

Experience shows that for an anti-corruption agency to succeed, it must be supported by strong laws, properly supervised and be able to discharge its duties without fear or favour. Hong Kong's vaunted policy of zero tolerance of corruption has won it many friends, but it has come at a price.

Although the Independent Commission Against Corruption possesses draconian powers, it is still fully accountable for what it does. The ICAC reports directly to the chief executive and its operations are scrutinised internally, and its officers work closely with the Department of Justice. It has a formidable record in combating corruption. Yet, some people have taken advantage of its good offices to pursue private agendas.

Some complaints received by the ICAC are undoubtedly frivolous or ill-intentioned. There may well be cases in which, as the former deputy commissioner, Tony Kwok Man-wai, has noted, political rivals seek to damage one another by lodging baseless complaints. The ICAC, however, is legally required to take all referrals seriously, notwithstanding its own reservations, and this poses a dilemma.

However tempted the ICAC may be to nip a case in the bud, it must always observe due process, even in flimsy cases. Any complaint of corruption has to be fully investigated. An elaborate system of checks and balances is in place, and a weak case cannot simply be buried.

All corruption investigations are overseen by the ICAC's powerful Operations Review Committee, chaired by Michael Sze Cho-cheung, the no-nonsense former secretary for the civil service, and comprising experts from various walks of life, including law and business. The committee, which receives reports on all corruption complaints made to the ICAC, scrutinises the basis of particular decisions and the way cases are handled. It exercises a vital mandate, and an investigation will only be ended with its agreement.

It is vital that if it becomes apparent that a complaint lacks any element of corruption, and does not otherwise fall within its jurisdiction, the ICAC must speedily resolve it. If there is a suspicion that a non-corruption crime has occurred, it should be referred to the police or other law enforcement agency. There can, after all, be no justification for the ICAC retaining a case which is outside its purview, even if high profile, and the Operations Review Committee must ensure that this does not happen.