Decision on newspaper search wasn't taken lightly, ICAC says

Legislators ask if it is only paying lip service to the seizure law

The ICAC had taken the decision to seek search warrants against newspapers' offices and journalists' homes this summer with great care, the commissioner told lawmakers yesterday.

Raymond Wong Hung-chiu also said the anti-graft body had always been fair and just.

But a number of legislators, including legal sector lawmaker Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, accused the Independent Commission Against Corruption of 'selective adherence to the law' for appealing against Mr Justice Michael Hartmann's decision that seeking the search warrants had been wrong but not challenging a subsequent Court of Appeal judgment so as to clarify the law.

Mr Justice Hartmann of the Court of First Instance had ruled the ICAC was wrong 'in fact and in law' to seek the search warrants instead of going the less intrusive route of a court order requiring relevant materials to be produced. The ICAC appealed against the decision.

The Court of Appeal, in dismissing the appeal because it ruled it did not have the jurisdiction to hear it, said the ICAC had acted entirely lawfully. The comments were not part of the binding judgment, although they do carry strong persuasive authority for future cases.

Mr Wong told members of the Legislative Council security panel the ICAC exercised great care, sought legal advice and took its request for the warrants to the High Court instead of the District Court as required by law. The case concerned the publication of the name of a person in the witness protection programme.