Graft-busters hit back angrily yesterday at allegations that they brought Kevin Egan and Andrew Lam Ping-cheung to trial because they saw the two lawyers as 'thorns in their side'.
'The ICAC vigorously pursues every case without fear or favour, in strict accordance with the laws,' a spokeswoman for the Independent Commission Against Corruption said. 'It is ridiculous to suggest the ICAC will target any individual due to his or her background. As a law enforcement agency, the ICAC only goes after anyone suspected of corruption and related offences.'
During their clients' trial on charges of conspiring to pervert the course of justice, defence counsel for Egan and Lam repeatedly referred to the two as 'thorns in the side of the ICAC', with a history of animosity going back to the two lawyers' victories in high-profile cases against the commission.
Graham Harris, for Lam, said in his closing submission that the anti-graft body was looking at the case as a 'heaven-sent' opportunity to settle some old scores.
The ICAC spokeswoman said yesterday that the case originated with a request from a Court of Appeal judge to investigate whether an offence under the Witness Protection Ordinance, or any other criminal offences, had been committed.
The judge made the request after the identity of a participant in the witness protection programme, revealed during habeas corpus proceedings in chamber, was reported in the press.
While the ICAC carried out its statutory duty to collect evidence in corruption and related cases, it was the Department of Justice that decided on prosecutions, the spokeswoman said.