Weigh pros and cons before giving ICAC extra powers
The anti-corruption watchdog says cases of misconduct in public office are difficult to investigate under the current code, yet with more power should come greater responsibility
Concerns of this kind, expressed by a senior officer, should be taken seriously. They require further consideration. But caution is also needed. Ever since the creation of the ICAC, it has been recognised that corruption is an especially difficult crime to investigate. Corrupt conduct is, by its nature, secret and evidence is not easy to obtain. This is why the ICAC has been given special powers of investigation for corruption offences.
The most draconian powers were removed after the Bill of Rights Ordinance came into force in 1991, but others remain. With extra powers come additional responsibilities. The courts have, at times, found the ICAC to have abused its special powers. The pros and cons of the call to extend the agency’s ability to investigate misconduct in public office should be weighed. Those responsible for committing such offences must be brought to justice. But care must also be taken to ensure that any extension of power is necessary and the right to a fair trial respected.