Hong Kong gov’t slams speculation over lenient penalty for contractor involved in corner-cutting rail scandal
Hong Kong Free Press
Hong Kong’s government has hit back at criticism of the prosecution’s decision to change the charge against a top construction company involved in the Shatin to Central rail link scandal.
Leighton Contractors (Asia) was fined HK$40,000 this week under the amended charge. But a whistleblower’s suggestion that the government was less willing to take action against a contractor involved in an MTR Corporation (MTRC) project was described as “irresponsible.”
Leighton was responsible for multiple engineering problems found at the Hung Hom MTR station expansion and the Exhibition Centre MTR station, including cutting steel bars instead of correctly screwing them into couplers.
The MTR projects director at the time had to resign as the government ordered the corporation to dismiss relevant managerial figures. An independent commission of inquiry into the construction problems was set up.
Despite being banned from placing bids for public construction contract for 21 months because of the scandal, Leighton was reported by local media to have won bids under the names of its subsidiaries.
The contractor was originally charged with failure to use correct materials as required by the Buildings Ordinance in 2020. However, the prosecution this month changed the charge to deviating from the approved construction plan .
Leighton was fined HK$40,000 on Wednesday after pleading guilty to the revised offence, which carries a maximum penalty of HK$1 million fine and three years of imprisonment.
The ‘hearsay’
Jason Poon, the whistleblower in the 2018 scandal, said on a radio programme on Wednesday that the government had shifted its grounds for prosecution.
Poon said the contractor was only charged specifically with deviating from the work plan for the ventilation plant rooms, but not with other practices such as cutting steel bars improperly.
The building engineer added that the ventilation plant room error, unlike the other issues that were discovered by the commission, had been flagged by the MTRC itself.
The previous charge – despite carrying the same maximum penalties as the new one – would have allowed more findings by the commission of inquiry to be used as evidence, Poon added.
Citing what he called “hearsay,” Poon said the government did not bring any other prosecutions despite having enough evidence because it owned 70 per cent of the MTRC’s shares, and “the government is less willing to implicate MTRC in the turbulence in legal proceedings.”
Lawmaker Michael Tien said he had heard that the government would not lay any further charges against MTRC or the contractor. “This is the end of it,” Tien told the same radio programme, pledging to continue following up on the matter in the Legislative Council.
He added that the prosecution would be deemed problematic if this was the only charge brought against Leighton.
Government’s reaction
Releasing three statements on the ruling in a day, the government said the change of charge was intended to maximise the chance of a successful conviction, adding that the two offences were of similar gravity.
“There is no question of the amended charge being less serious than the original charge,” one of the statements read.
In response to Poon’s claim, the government said prosecutorial decisions were based on an objective assessment of evidence, and every case must be handled in a “fair, just and impartial manner.”
“We reiterate that no one should make groundless conclusions or make untrue, unfair and irresponsible remarks,” the government said, adding that it would not offer any comments on the case at this stage.
It added that both the Building Department and the Department of Justice were studying the verdict to consider whether an appeal should be lodged.
Support HKFP | Code of Ethics | Error/typo? | Contact Us | Newsletter | Transparency & Annual Report | Apps
Help safeguard press freedom & keep HKFP free for all readers by supporting our team
Support press freedom & help us surpass 1,000 monthly Patrons: 100% independent, governed by an ethics code & not-for-profit.
