ICAC's questionable acts under fire for years
The ICAC has been at the forefront of the fight against corruption in the city for more than three decades. But it has often used controversial tactics in its pursuit of graft suspects, at times prompting criticism from the courts.
In the most recent case, a District Court judge on Tuesday acquitted a police officer accused of accepting a bribe because he suspected that two anti-graft officers might have had improper discussions before making their own statements.
In May, Court of Appeal judges freed two contractors twice convicted of bribing former housing official and Canto-pop singer Eason Chan Yik-shun's father, Chan Kau-tai. The judges ruled the ICAC's method of collecting evidence was unjustified.
The Law Society has long voiced concern about ICAC's tapping confidential telephone conversations between lawyers and their clients.
Mr Justice Woo Kwok-hing, commissioner on interception of communications and surveillance, said last year that there were four cases of unauthorised phone tapping of such conversations in 2007 in which the principle of legal professional privilege might have been undermined.
Woo criticised the ICAC for committing two serious breaches. In one case, the agency transposed the numbers in a wire-tapping operation, leading to the interception of an innocent person's phone calls for a few days. In the other case, Woo said he received incorrect information about unauthorised tapping of lawyer-client conversations in 2007 and he was forced to look at the case again. The mistakes cost him much time.
Human Rights Monitor director Law Yuk-kai fears the ICAC is overzealous in the use of its powers.
'As part of the ICAC's special investigation powers, the commissioner is authorised to obtain, with judicial permission, information from suspects and non-suspects,' he said.
'An interview with ICAC officers probing a complaint can be a traumatic experience for anyone, especially when the person is innocent. And the pressure on someone being investigated by the ICAC is tremendous. They may contact his family, friends or business partners.'
Law also criticised the high-profile ICAC arrests of some people when in the end there were no prosecutions. 'Many people still have the impression that when one is arrested by the ICAC, there must be something wrong about the person and the watchdog has ample evidence.'
Noting that a number of prosecutions had collapsed with judges criticising the conduct of its investigators, he said the cases displayed the ICAC's ruthlessness in obtaining proof and a sloppiness in preparing some cases.
In July 2005, four graft suspects walked free and the judge blasted the agency for secretly taping a conversation in a 'cynical' and 'flagrant' abuse of human rights. District Court Deputy Judge Julia Livesey said the ICAC violated fundamental rights guaranteed under the Basic Law when it taped talks between one of the accused and his solicitor.
Law said the ICAC should strike a balance between seeking justice and protecting the rights of people. 'It is sad to see that due to the watchdog's inappropriate handling, some guilty people were freed while some innocent people had to face interrogation ... from the investigators.'
