The 14th session of the trial of the city’s former top prosecutor, Ho Chio Meng, occurred Friday at the Court of Final Appeal. Several witnesses were called to provide testimonies, including one of Ho’s former drivers, and a computer technician working at the Prosecution Office (MP).
Ho’s former driver, Mok Chi Seng was the first to be presented to the court. Ho’s lawyer, Leong Weng Pun, questioned Mok in regard to the day of Ho’s arrest.
Mok recalled that on February 26 Ho contacted his secretary to book ferry tickets
to Hong Kong departing from Macau at noon.
Ho then instructed Mok to pick him up at his residence, One Grantai, at 11 a.m., one hour before his ferry departed from Macau. Mok revealed that when he visited Ho’s residence to fetch him, Ho was empty handed and carrying no luggage.
On the way to the ferry, Ho told Mok that he would return to Macau at 9 p.m. on the same day, and directed Mok to pick him up around that time.
The assistant prosecutor, Kuok Un Man, pointed out that on the day before Ho Chio Meng was arrested, Ho contacted Mok via mobile phone. However, the device used by Ho at the time has since disappeared. Mok responded that he was not in possession of the device. Kuok questioned whether Ho had discarded it on the way to the ferry terminal. Mok said he did not know.
The second male witness was a computer technician from the MP. The prosecution questioned him mainly about the MP’s computer maintenance outsourcing contract, specifically, whether he ever considered that the price charged for the maintenance was not commensurate with the service.
The witness responded that he could not answer the question as pricing matters were not part of his job.
When the morning’s trial session was about to conclude, Ho had the opportunity to comment. He denied again that he was detained last year due to his intention to escape from Macau.
Ho said that, through MP, he had in fact booked return ferry tickets. During the morning’s session, the prosecution presented evidence from the Commission Against Corruption (CCAC) which showed that Ho had left CCAC at 6.30 p.m. on February 5, 2015.
Ho added that he did not leave CCAC right after the investigations were concluded. Instead, he visited the CCAC commissioner, Andre Cheong Weng Chon. Ho said that their conversation needed to remain confidential and thanked Cheong for his discretion.
In the afternoon session, a female witness who is currently working at MP, attended court to testify.
The prosecution asked questions concerning specific contract outsourcing, the MP’s hosting of guests, the Hotline Center and the Cheoc Van villa.
The witness explained she used to prepare contract proposals, and to receive the MP’s guests. She remarked that despite the MP rarely accommodating groups of less than three people, the situation did indeed occur.
She also claimed that she had doubts regarding some of MP’s contracts. However, despite her reservations, she continued to process the contracts as instructed by her former superior, Chan Ka Fai.
She also said that none of the guests welcomed by her had ever been taken to Cheoc Van villa or to the 16th floor of the Hotline Center.
When the witness finished providing her testimony, prosecutor Kuok responded to Ho’s morning statement.
Kuok informed the court that records showed Ho only booked a one-way ferry ticket to Hong Kong. Kuok added that the single ticket was not to be used, as Ho was ready to take a helicopter to leave Macau.
Ho defended himself reaffirming that he had the return tickets with him at the time the CCAC apprehended him.
According to Ho, he decided to travel by helicopter because a well-known Hong Kong figure, surnamed Lau, had booked it for him so that he could arrive in Hong Kong earlier for lunch, and so he could have time in the afternoon to take care of his affairs.
In addition, Ho said that he was arrested even before he entered the Macau Ferry Terminal, which means that he did not take the helicopter.
Ho said that “Lau is not an average person,” and that Lau told him he himself would book the helicopter for Ho.
The issue he planned to discuss with Lau was related to a Macau lawmaker.
“I didn’t pass [through] the immigration department,” said Ho. Ho added that the prosecution had not replied to his statement regarding the time he left CCAC in 2015.
Prosecutor Kuok affirmed that “he had no tickets with him.” Kuok restated that no return tickets were found on Ho.
Ho also made an additional comment about a situation mentioned by the afternoon’s witness. Ho said that “in the past 15 years, there must have been times when I welcomed groups of less than three people.”
The court resumes this morning.
mp
took
measures
to
ensure
‘legality
and
transparency’
THE PUBLIC Prosecutions Office (MP) said in a statement on Friday that since Ip Son Sang took office in December 2014, it “has actively taken measures to improve the procedures for acquiring goods and services, increasing the legality and transparency of contracts.” The reply follows the statements of former Public Prosecutor General, Ho Chio Meng, during the court session on Thursday. As reported in the Times , Ho claimed to have received at least one letter informing him of irregularities in the new contracts signed under Ip’s leadership, evidence which MP claims not to have found among Ho’s seized documents. In Friday’s statement, the MP welcomes scrutiny of all existing expenditures as well as projected expenditures.
No Comments