Assistant prosecutor general Kong Chi has explained his relationship with the co-defendants as he continued his self-defence at the Court of Second Instance.
Macau’s senior prosecutor has been accused of bribery and of forming a criminal syndicate, among other charges.
The prosecution wanted to prove the existence of the criminal syndicate, which Kong denied on the first day of the hearing Friday.
Kong was repeatedly questioned to prove he was unfamiliar with lawyer Kuan Hoi Lon, the fourth defendant in the case. For example, he was asked about the fact that Choi Sao Ieng, the second defendant, had texted him about Kuan obtaining a lawyer’s license.
Kong rebutted by asking how he could refuse the text message. “It was Choi texting me,” he said.
Kong also said he had been friends with Choi for over a decade “and could talk about anything.” He said Choi has many connections and considered it a waste that Choi did not work as a legal executive. Kong remembered telling Choi that “if [Kuan] had any questions” after Kuan became lawyer, she could ask Kong.
The prosecution said Kong and Choi had once discussed Kuan’s legal fee. Kong suggested to Choi that Kuan charge her client MOP30,000 for a case, which Kong considered to be a simple one. As such, the prosecution believed Kong had the ability to set pricing on Kuan’s cases.
Kong reiterated his unfamiliarity with Kuan by saying they were “not only unfamiliar, but so much so that [he] wouldn’t even recognize [Kuan].” He said he was only giving an opinion to Choi, and asked if that meant that he had participated in the law firm’s operations.
According to Kong, Choi and he became friends as he had exchanged money at Choi’s legal currency exchange establishment. He admitted to referring Hunan native association members to Choi’s establishment.
Choi later gave Kong a privileged exchange rate.
Kong was then asked if he had helped his colleagues at the Public Prosecutions Office (MP) exchange money. He admitted to telling colleagues about the privileged rates.
He was then questioned about the reasonability of making profits from exchange rate differences. Kong said it was reasonable, as his colleagues could enjoy better exchange rates, while he did not actually make any profits, “just a few tens of dollars from several tens of thousand dollars exchanged.”
When asked whether he considered it appropriate to discuss MP cases with Choi, saying that it was only chit-chat between friends, he asked what the problem was with this.
Kong stressed he did not receive any remuneration for offering Choi legal opinions.
The prosecution also asked Kong about certain wording found in his computer. For example, Kong has a log of HKD350,000, which the prosecution believed was remuneration from returning some items in custody to a suspect. The indictment said that in 2011, the Macao Customs had found and seized some counterfeit merchandise at a jewelry shop.
Kong said this was the fund to be used to open a pawn shop and a branch for a currency exchange establishment. However, after filing the application with the monetary authority, Kong was told off-record by a friend at the authority that it would not be approved. He stressed that the investor had retrieved most of the money.
Meanwhile, presiding judge Tong Hio Fong doubted the Macao Customs’ case was properly handled.
There were 47 items in custody, but Kong was accused of shelving the case without ordering the Customs to investigate. He was said to have returned various pieces of diamonds to the suspect and only ordered the destruction of a belt buckle.
He explained that normally it was the Customs role to identify the authenticity of such items. However, after the legal investigation period ended, the Customs had only identified one item. Seeing the procedure end, Kong and his colleagues had discussed how the items should be handled, and later decided to do what he did.
He also explained that even if the MP ordered the Customs to destroy the items, the Customs would eventually ask the MP for an opinion, so he thought he handled the items in the most appropriate way.
No Comments