Rafael Hui & the Kwok Brothers: A Corruption Saga (Part 2)
As a follow up to our previous article, “Rafael Hui & the Kwok Brothers: A Corruption Saga (Part 1)”, we now revisit the topic as the outcome has finally been decided. The long anticipated result of Hong Kong’s largest corruption trial since its return from the British Government’s rule in 1997 has finally been determined, after a span of 131 days. The decision alone took the jurors five days, which attests to the difficulty of the case. However, before we discuss the result, we will quickly summarise the facts and backgrounds of the case. Background The Jury Has Spoken
*after taking into account that the sentenced period for some of the counts would be served concurrently, and after discounts given after plea in mitigation Inherent contradictions in verdict? Further, it is noted that for Count 7, apart from Mr. Hui, only Francis Kwan and Thomas Chan were found guilty, but both the Kwok brothers were acquitted. Some may think that Francis Kwan and Thomas Chan would not have paid Mr. Hui HK$11.182 million for the benefit of SHKP without the consent of their superior i.e. the Kwok brothers. The trial judge Mr Justice Andrew Macrae briefly addressed on this point during sentencing and commented that he did not find the jury’s verdict on Count 7 inconsistent with his directions. He further commented that one possible reason for the not guilty verdicts for the Kwok brothers may be that the jury found that there was a conspiracy to bribe Mr. Hui in which Francis Kwan and Thomas Chan were a part, but the jury was unsure as to how and when they got the money to bribe Mr. Hui. Having said that, readers should be reminded that in a jury trial, the jury is only required to inform the court of their decision, but not how and why they reached such decision. Therefore it is impossible for anyone, including the trial judge, to know the exact reason for the verdict. There may well be good reasons or evidence to support the jury’s decisions, but it is nevertheless expected that such seemingly inherent contradictions may be used as a ground of appeal. Appeal is expected |
|
IMPORTANT: |
|
For enquiries, please contact our Litigation & Dispute Resolution Department: |
E: criminal@onc.hk | T: (852) 2810 1212 |