ICAC must act on Donald Tsang case or risk further damage to reputation

Delay in justice," said Walter Savage Landor, "is injustice." As the Independent Commission Against Corruption, with justifiable pride, celebrates its 40th anniversary , it is timely to recall its core values of efficiency, professionalism and courage, as epitomised by its founding father, Sir Jack Cater, the first commissioner. Although the techniques of law enforcement have changed greatly since 1974, the need for the ICAC to use its powers wisely and to ensure just outcomes has not.

Criminal investigations should, if possible, be handled expeditiously, not least because suspects need to know their fate within a reasonable time. If high-profile cases are unreasonably delayed, it can also fuel public concern and undermine confidence in the legal system.

Of course, some investigations are vast, and, even with the best will in the world, it may be impossible to hurry things along. Some fraud cases, for example, involve many suspects, a mass of evidence and inquiries around the globe. Most cases, however, are not in this category, and investigators must minimise delays. Of late, however, some sensitive cases have simply disappeared into an abyss, most notably that of the former chief executive, Donald Tsang Yam-kuen.

Exactly two years ago, Tsang was referred to the ICAC for investigation over allegations that he had accepted undue advantages from tycoons. Although they were sensational, the allegations fell within a narrow compass, centring on alleged improprieties in Hong Kong, Macau and Shenzhen. It should, within months, have been possible for the ICAC to interview witnesses, examine records and decide if the case was pursuable.

Moreover, the ICAC's highly regarded director of operations, Daniel Li Ming-chak, who had been due to retire in April 2012, agreed to remain in the post for a further three months to handle the Tsang investigation. Li, presumably, wrapped things up before he departed in July 2012; otherwise, he would have stayed on longer. The ICAC, however, has remained tight-lipped ever since on the progress of the case, and the silence is now deafening.

Last August, when the retiring director of public prosecutions was urged to be more proactive and to clear his backlog of cases, he claimed that the Tsang investigation was "near completion". This, however, was not confirmed by the ICAC, and smacked instead of wishful thinking. Six months on, the case is still outstanding.

The investigation may, of course, have died, in which case the public should be told. The ICAC, with its fine traditions, must certainly not allow internal problems or concerns over a public backlash to override its duty to openly account for its conduct of cases. Nobody will understand this better than the current director of operations, Ryan Wong Sai-chiu, a principled veteran, but the fact that even he has not been able to move things along is a real concern and may suggest that other forces are at play.