The ICAC has been politicised - but not by Leung
Mike Rowse says the high-profile complaint against Franklin Lam was but a smear campaign
There has been a lot of talk recently about "politicisation" of the Independent Commission Against Corruption.
Much of the commentary has been very wide of the mark and, in some cases, the logic of the situation has been turned completely upside down.
Let me begin by setting out the credentials which I believe allow me to speak with some authority. I arrived in Hong Kong in 1972, at which time corruption was rampant within the public service and in particular the police force. During 1973 and 1974, while working as a reporter for a tabloid newspaper, I specialised in writing stories about corruption.
When the ICAC was established and advertised for recruits, I joined the Operations Department in the first wave and was a proud member of Induction Course 1A. I stayed for three years in operations and also spent three years in the Corruption Prevention Department.
Because the forces of darkness were perceived to be all powerful, a priority in those years was to persuade the public at large to report at all. They were afraid of retribution and the new organisation had first to earn credibility. Most of the early reports were anonymous. Hence, the emphasis right from the outset was on protecting the identity of informants.
Bit by bit as the ICAC won its spurs, the situation improved and gradually the proportion of those making reports who were prepared to identify themselves crept up. They are now very much the majority.
