Jason Chao and Scott Chiang hand a petition to a CCAC representative
New Macau Association (ANM) delivered a complaint to a representative of the Commission Against Corruption (CCAC) yesterday, calling on the institution to investigate whether Ng Lap Seng’s San Kin Ip Group had benefited by presenting adulterated United Nations (UN) documents to an investment bank and another unidentified international organization.
The association claims that the practice might have illegitimately advantaged the group, through “claiming, in some way, the endorsement of the UN for the construction of a Permanent Expo and Meeting Center in Macau.”
“This practice may be a criminal offence in Macau,” said group vice-president Jason Chao, “and that’s why we hope that the CCAC will conduct an investigation.”
Following the arrest of Ng in September over allegations of bribing UN officials, the United States federal court and the internal audit office of the UN respectively made the related criminal complaint and the audit report public.
According to ANM, the facts described in those documents suggest that Macau may have jurisdiction over the matter, leading ANM yesterday to call on the CCAC to take the helm in the investigation. The Times could not find any mention of Macau jurisdiction in the two reports, and representatives of ANM admitted that it does not expressly state that this is the case, adding that “based on the facts […] Macau should have jurisdiction over [the case].”
“[CCAC Commissioner] André Cheong previously told the public that Macau has no jurisdiction over the case but in the past few days the Internal Audit Service of the United Nations has published another report. From that report we know that some activities were carried out in Macau. For instance, Ng Lap Seng invited UN officials to Macau to attend a conference at which
some staff members were given iPads,” said Jason Chao yesterday. “This practice was condemned by the Internal Audit Service of the United Nations.”
The audit report merely states that at this stage, certain allegations “of the present report are still under investigation by the concerned law enforcement authorities of the host country.” That host country is implied, though unstated, to be Macau, where the conference in question took place.
The criminal complaint unsealed by the US federal court does reveal, however, that John Ashe, then-president of the UN General Assembly and Ambassador for Antigua and Barbuda, made “minor editorial changes” to a UN official document that actually transpired to be significant modifications.
Additionally, as per the audit report, these changes were substantial enough to require “the document [to] be reissued in its entirety,” as it included two new paragraphs, the name of Ng’s company San Kin Ip group and the name of the “Permanent Expo and Meeting Centre.”
“In exchange for the bribes, Ashe agreed to and did perform official actions for businessmen who were seeking benefits from the UN,” reads the U.S. federal court report. “In exchange for these payments from Ng, among other actions, Ashe submitted a UN document to the UN Secretary General, which claimed that there was a purported need to build the UN Macau Conference Center.”
Citing Article 16 of the UN Convention Against Corruption, ANM claims that Macau is obligated to criminalize the bribery of officials of public international organizations.
The current law regarding this issue, no. 10/2014 “Regime of Prevention and Repression of Acts of Corruption in External Commerce,” only considers the bribery of an official of such an organization in relation to the conduct of international business as a criminal offense.
Ng Lap Seng’s alleged bribery of UN officials would fall within the scope of criminal law under no. 10/2014. However, since the activities reportedly occurred between 2011 and 2013, the non-
retroactivity of criminal law currently prevents it from being brought against Ng.
Therefore, ANM is also calling for “a revision of the law that criminalizes the bribery of officials of public international organizations and foreign public officials without a limit to international business.”Daniel Beitler
No Comments