How exactly did Rafael Hui favour Hong Kong developer SHKP? Barristers ask in court
Passing a guilty verdict without specific evidence was dangerous, appeal court told
Appeal lawyers in Hong Kong's highest-profile corruption case continued yesterday to tear into the prosecution's lack of evidence to show what exactly a former number-two official did to favour Sun Hung Kai Properties in return for bribes running into the millions.
The defence focus was sharpened on the second day of a week-long appeal to challenge the convictions of two former top SHKP executives - tycoon Thomas Kwok Ping-kwong and his ex-aide, Thomas Chan Kui-yuen.
Barristers for the pair contended the court, without identifying how Rafael Hui Si-yan had seriously abused his power as chief secretary between 2005 and 2007, was on dangerous ground in convicting their clients based on what the lawyers described as mere ties of friendliness.
READ MORE: Week-long appeal in Rafael Hui bribery scandal gets under way
But one of the three appeal judges differed. Mr Justice Wally Yeung Chun-kuen repeatedly posed the question of why businessmen would pay a high-ranking official other than for the possibility of getting a helping hand when in need, and whether that was not criminal.
The defence lawyers said it was not. "There must be an intention to act or do something before it is capable of amounting to a crime," Ian Winter QC, for former SHKP executive director Chan, told the Court of Appeal.
He claimed the prosecution created a "hybrid" of crime - an accusation of misconduct without specific acts.
Earlier in the day, Clare Montgomery QC, for Kwok, had elaborated on how Hui had disfavoured the former SHKP co-chairman while in office.