Defence lawyer questions reasonability of case details

While denying the charges against them, two defendants allegedly involved in the bribery case concerning two former construction officials said the details were unreasonable.

The case entered the second day of closing statements yesterday.

Alleged to have been involved in the crimes of a triad gang, a criminal syndicate, bribery and aggravated money laundering, the eighth defendant Lao Pou Fong’s lawyer, Lee Kam Iut, said her client was only following her employer’s orders while performing the job in which violations are now alleged to have occurred. She worked as an administrative secretary.

On the matters related to the merger of land plots TN20 and TN24, Lee referred to the exhibits presented to the court to highlight that any terms assuring the government’s approval on the merger were absent in the agreement between San Kin Tai Limited and Jiayuan International.

The former had tried to sell the land to the latter. With this said, Lee said the transaction was based on the land’s market value. The lawyer added that while the seller was a publicly listed company, transaction agreements ought to be made sufficiently unambiguous. She then questioned why the term was not included in the contract, given its importance to the valuation of the land.

Citing her client, the lawyer said the application for merger of the aforementioned land was filed after the transaction on the request by the new company. She then pointed to several witness testimonies from the former Land, Public Works and Transport Bureau (DSSOPT) to prove former director Li Canfeng had not intervened nor exerted any pressure.

She also cited the department head for legal affairs of the former bureau, who said the Secretary for Transport and Public Works was industrious at work, to prove it was impossible Li would approve a Dispatch with inclination, so as to deceive his then superintendents to get the merger approved.

On the allegations concerning a duplex apartment in the Windsor Arch complex, the lawyer cited two property valuation reports that assert that the transaction price was much lower than the market value, implying that the allegations of sending over MOP3.8 million to Li as bribes were unfounded. The lawyer also questioned the practice of paying the alleged bribe in cashier’s check, which would place the payment fully on record.

The ninth defendant, Leong Ka I, who is the fourth defendant’s goddaughter and businessperson Ng Lap Seng, were accused of crimes related to a triad gang and a criminal syndicate, as well as money laundering.

While discussing the office unit in Dong Da commercial center, her lawyer Chan Pei Kei said she was unaware of the owner being Li and the price of the transaction. Chan cited her client’s then young age as a supporting fact. Instead, his client was told by Ng the rental would support her daily living costs.

Ng’s and Leong’s families have had a positive relationship for over three decades, proving that phone conversations between them were reasonable and accusations based on this fact were unjustified. The lawyer also said no wire-tap data had proven Leong’s involvement in the case.