UpdateDecision not to prosecute former Hong Kong anti-corruption boss sparks scepticism and call for fuller disclosure

The decision by the Department of Justice to not prosecute the former ICAC commissioner was the subject of much debate in the city, as the watchdog’s former investigator called for full disclosure of legal advice against prosecuting Timothy Tong Hin-ming, who was accused of excessive spending on official visits, gifts and meals during his five-year tenure between 2007 to 2012.

Former Independent Commission Against Corruption investigator Lam Cheuk-ting said the substance of legal advice sought from Jonathan Caplan QC should be disclosed in full so that the public could judge whether the decision of dropping Tong’s charges was fair.

“It’s quite incomprehensible why the department would think there was insufficient evidence to charge Tong,” Lam said.

READ MORE: Former Hong Kong anti-corruption commissioner Timothy Tong Hin-ming to face no further criminal probe

Democratic Party’s lawmaker Albert Ho Chun-yan called the reasons for not prosecuting Tong “unconvincing” and said the justice minister had “adopted a very low threshold” in determining whether Tong’s conduct violated the law.

Ho added that the general public would have the impression that different standards had been applied to Tong compared to former chief executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen.

READ MORE: Timothy Tong: Hong Kong anti-graft head never admitted wrongdoing

“If the same standards were being applied … it would be more than likely that [Timothy Tong] would be prosecuted,” he said.

But another former ICAC investigator, Char Shik-ngor, said yesterday’s decision might be justified.
“There are two levels to it,” Char said. “As a citizen, I am a bit disappointed. But from a legal point of view, it’s all about evidence … If there was no evidence, there would be no prima facie case and therefore no prosecution.”