Bribery still exists though purpose not achieved

Mr Lee had a chain of several karaoke restaurants in Guangdong. He offered lavish entertainment and red packet to Mr Cheung, a bank staff of the loans department, during the site inspection of the karaoke restaurants.

Cover
Image
Bribery still exists though purpose not achieved
fade-up
container

Mr Lee was the proprietor of a karaoke restaurant in Hong Kong. Together with his friends, he had recently opened a chain of several karaoke restaurants in Guangdong and purchased a considerable amount of related audio-visual equipment. 

Though business was still in the early stage of development, Mr Lee rushed ahead with rapid business expansion. To cope with the cash flow problem, Mr Lee applied for a hire purchase loan from a bank in Hong Kong. To secure a larger loan, he inflated the number and prices of the equipment in the application, and falsely represented that he had purchased some advanced brand new audio-visual equipment from overseas. The bank sent Mr Cheung, an officer of the loans department, to inspect Lee’s karaoke restaurants in Guangdong. Mr Lee took the opportunity to play the good host to Mr Cheung. Claiming that it was a way to extend hospitality, Mr Lee also presented Mr Cheung with expensive dried seafood and spirits. 

After returning to Hong Kong, Mr Lee once again hosted a lavish feast for Mr Cheung. During the meal, after learning that Mr Cheung had recently become a father, Mr Lee immediately gave him a 'red packet' containing several thousand Hong Kong dollars. Mr Lee explicitly expressed his hope that Mr Cheung could help him secure the loan. Mr Cheung initially refused the red packet, but, upon Mr Lee’s insistence, he finally accepted it. 

Two weeks later, as the loan still had not been approved and the karaoke business showed no signs of improvement, Mr Lee started to worry and became agitated. He called Mr Cheung again and asked about the progress of his loan application. What should Mr Cheung do?

Case Analysis

Under Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO), it is an offence for any agent, without the approval of his principal, to solicit or accept an advantage as a reward for or an inducement to perform an act in relation to his principal’s affairs or business. The offeror will also be guilty of the offence. Even if the acceptance of bribes takes place outside Hong Kong, if any part of the bribery act (including offering, soliciting or accepting a bribe) takes place in Hong Kong, the case can be pursued under the POBO. Furthermore, according to Section 11 of the POBO, as long as the offeror of bribes intends to induce the acceptor to extend his/her favour(s), both parties would have committed bribery offence even if the acceptor claims that he/she 'did not actually have the power to do so', 'did not intend to do so' or 'did not, in fact, do so'. Hence, Mr Lee might have committed the offence of offering bribes and could not claim in his defence that the purpose of the bribes had not been carried out. Similarly, if Mr Cheung had accepted the red packet without declaring it to the bank, he might also have committed an offence even if he had not ultimately helped Mr Lee. 

Entertainment means the provision of food and drink for immediate consumption, whereas dried seafood, spirits or red packets are advantages. The offeror cannot offer bribes in excuse of 'an established custom in the trade or 'trade practice'. According to Section 19 of the POBO, the court will not accept such defence on the part of either the offeror or the acceptor, but will only consider whether or not the acceptor has the permission of the principal. 

According to the guidelines laid down in the Supervisory Policy Manual — Code of Conduct (the Code) issued by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, a bank employee must declare any advantage received in the course of business. While the acceptance of mere entertainment does not constitute an offence, entertainment that is in any way luxurious is very likely a prelude to corruption or bribery. Hence, the Code further stipulates that a bank employee can only accept normal business entertainment such as an ordinary meal. 

When facing corruption temptation, Mr Cheung should make a declaration in compliance with the Code and report the offering of gifts and red packets offered by Mr Lee to the bank in order to protect himself from being implicated in a bribery case.

Unauthorized rebate from supplier

Mr Chow, one of the four shareholders of a chemical engineering company in Hong Kong, was in charge of procurement for its mainland factory.  A Hong Kong supplier tried to secure orders from Mr Chow by presenting him expensive gift and offering him rebate

Cover
Image
Unauthorized rebate from supplier
fade-up
container

Mr Chow started a joint venture with three of his friends by setting up a chemical engineering company in Hong Kong and a chemical manufacturing factory in Guangdong. The four of them were all directors of the company, each holding 25% of the company shares. 

As Mr Chow had substantial experience in operating factories in Chinese Mainland and had developed an extensive business network in Hong Kong and Chinese Mainland especially with Mainland suppliers and government officials, he offered to manage the Mainland factory as the paid General Manager in charge of the business there. 

Mr Chow often boasted that the success of the Mainland factory was due to his networking clout. At the same time, he kept grumbling that he had to cover the enormous entertainment expenses with his own money. As the General Manager of the Mainland factory, Mr Chow was entrusted with key procurement decisions. When one of his Hong Kong suppliers learned that Mr Chow had recently bought a property in Chinese Mainland, he presented Mr Chow with an expensive audio- visual set-up, hoping that this gift would secure a contract for the supply of chemical raw materials. 

This seemingly thoughtful present soon brought its reward in the form of a first order from Mr Chow. To secure future business, the supplier also offered 5% of the transaction amount as a rebate to Mr Chow at his request. Subsequently, the bribe money was deposited into Mr Chow’s bank account in Hong Kong.

Case Analysis

Under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO), the principal of a company is the entire Board of Directors, while individual shareholders or directors are considered as agents. In this case, Mr Chow was an 'agent' as he was one of the shareholders and the paid General Manager of the factory. Prior to any solicitation or acceptance of any advantage in the course of business, Mr Chow should have obtained permission from the Board of Directors.

The principal’s permission should be definite and given in advance in accordance with Section 9 of the POBO. Otherwise, the agent has to apply for permission as soon as reasonably practicable after the acceptance. In addition for such permission to be lawful, the principal must have carefully considered the application before granting permission. 

Mr Chow’s company had not stated clearly in advance whether or not its staff members could accept advantages in relation to their duties. During the investigation, Mr Chow claimed that he had notified other shareholders that the rebates concerned were used to cover the entertainment expenses incurred in Chinese Mainland. Nevertheless, he had, in fact, only casually brought this matter to the attention of just two of the shareholders. Furthermore, the arrangement had not been discussed at any board meeting or formally approved, and there was no record of the accepted rebates, nor how they were dealt with. As such, Mr Chow was considered not to have obtained the company’s permission to accept the rebate at the material time. Moreover, he had not applied for retrospective approval from his company, and his acceptance of the rebates was not known to and approved by all shareholders. Thus Mr Chow accepted the rebates without the principal’s permission. 

To protect the interest of the companies and their stakeholders, companies should take the initiative to formulate rules and regulations governing the acceptance of advantages by their board members and staff and to state clearly in writing the company’s stance and policy regarding acceptance of advantages, and entertainment. The procedures for declaring acceptance of advantages and the channels for making enquiries should also be laid down and made known to all staff.