If Raymond accepted advantages from Mr Wang and agreed to submit an inspection report containing false results to his employer (i.e. the inspection body), he would contravene Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).  Even if no advantage was involved, Raymond would still breach Section 9(3) of the POBO by submitting false documents with an intent to deceive his employer.  Mr Wang, who offered the bribe, would also commit an offence under POBO.

Although the advantages were offered outside Hong Kong, the offence may still be prosecuted under POBO if any act of bribery (including offering, soliciting, accepting, promising, or agreeing to accept an advantage without permission) took place in Hong Kong.  For example, submitting a false inspection report to his employer in Hong Kong falls within the scope of the Ordinance. 

As a staff member of an independent third-party inspection body, Raymond is required to maintain impartiality and professional independence.  He should decline excessive, frequent or lavish entertainment offered by assessed organisations to avoid actual or perceived conflicts of interest, and strictly comply with his company’s policies on the acceptance of advantage and entertainment.

If Danny and Eric deliberately included false data in the testing reports with intent to deceive their employer, they would contravene Section 9(3) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, even if no advantage was obtained.

Testing technicians must uphold the highest standards of professional integrity at all times.  Diligently carrying out each testing procedure ensures the accuracy and reliability of test results, protects consumers from potentially hazardous products, and safeguards public confidence in the industry.

If Mr Lee accepted advantages from Ms Wong, and agreed to divulge sensitive information to the latter, he would contravene Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).  Ms Wong, who offered the bribe, would also commit an offence under POBO.

Protecting patent information is crucial for safeguarding the rights of inventors and organisations, and maintaining a competitive edge in the market.  To prevent, detect and deter similar malpractices, companies are advised to adopt adequate corruption prevention measures in the relevant process.

Case Analysis

Tony may have committed fraud by submitting false quotations to inflate the costs of digital solutions and falsely representing that the applicants had borne the required portion of project costs under the scheme.  Even if the applications were submitted by Tony on behalf of his clients, the SME clients may also incur criminal liability if they knowingly allowed the use of false quotations and supporting documents with the intent of securing approval of the subsidies.

On the other hand, Tony’s attempt to bribe a government official responsible for processing the applications may constitute an offence under Section 4 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance.  Section 4 prohibits any person from offering an advantage to a public servant as an inducement to or reward for that public servant’s performing or abstaining from performing any act in his or her official capacity.

To prevent, detect and deter similar malpractices, grantors and applicants of funding schemes are advised to adopt adequate corruption prevention measures in their operations.

An outside employment is an advantage under the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO).   If Kenny accepted the consultant post for making Philip’s company an authorised vendor of the telephone company, he might be charged of acceptance of bribe.  Philip might also be charged of offering of bribe. Both of them would commit an offence under Section 9 of the POBO.

Besides, there would also be a potential conflict of interest for Kenny to take up the consultant post in Philip’s engineering company even if no bribery was involved.  Kenny should declare his interest by informing his employer in writing of this outside employment.

Divulging information to unauthorised parties for personal gain is a criminal act under anti-corruption law.  The sales supervisor had committed Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance.  Leaking customers’ personal data is also a breach of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance and can expose the company to damaging lawsuits.

In a case of this kind, a great deal of time was usually required in identifying the suspect during the investigation, because the client database was open to many staff members for reasons of operating efficiency.  If no security measures were in place to control the retrieval of information, innocent staff would be  unhappy to find that they were suspected of the illegal act when investigation was required.  Besides, some staff members like the sales supervisor in this case might consider it a trivial matter to trade client information for some extra cash, especially when the information was so easily accessible.  

Where important data such as customer details, business plans, product designs, etc., are kept in digital formats, this becomes an area that is vulnerable to corruption and related crimes.  Managers must therefore be vigilant in maintaining the security of valuable information. Irrespective of the format in which it is stored, managers should classify information into different security levels according to the degree of sensitivity and confidentiality.   This helps prevent unauthorised access.

It is crucial that managers inform staff clearly of the serious consequences, both for themselves and for the company, that can result from the unauthorised disclosure of company information. The human resources policy of the company should be regularly reviewed and constantly enforced to provide the necessary deterrents against misconduct, e.g. any breach will result in dismissal and report to the relevant law enforcement agencies.

Bernard was facing an ethical dilemma that might put his personal values such as fairness, responsibility and honesty to challenge. In handling the situation, Bernard should identify the relevant facts and take stock of all stakeholders concerned. The following factors should be taken into consideration when identifying viable alternatives and choosing the best course of action:

1. Any violation to his professional, industry specific, or company code of conduct?
2. Is it against the Law?
3. Does it correspond with his self-values such as fairness, responsibility and honesty?
4. Can he disclose his decision to others openly and honestly without misgivings?

The ETHICS PLUS ethical decision making model might be helpful for him in solving his ethical.

Soliciting bribes from overseas companies is also subject to prosecution

Though the supplier, from which Mr Fong solicited bribes, was outside Hong Kong, Mr Fong might still commit an offence of soliciting an advantage under Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO) as he sent text messages requesting for loans to be deposited into his wife’s bank account in Hong Kong in return for placing more orders.

Businesspersons should be aware that the POBO can apply when part of the corrupt act, e.g. promising, agreeing, soliciting or accepting advantages without permission, takes place in Hong Kong.

Accepting bribes, whether directly or indirectly, is against the law

Loan is considered an advantage under the POBO. Accepting bribes regardless of whether the advantage is directly given to the acceptor or indirectly delivered to a third party is still against the law. In the case study, if the Mainland herbal supplier agreed to deposit the loans into Mr Fong’s wife’s bank account in Hong Kong, as long as it was proven that the receiving account was controlled by Mr Fong or that he was the ultimate beneficiary, Mr Fong would be considered as having accepted the advantage.

Flora was facing an ethical dilemma that might compromise her personal values such as honesty, responsibility, respect and compassion. In handling the situation, Flora should identify the relevant facts and take stock of all stakeholders concerned. The following factors should be taken into consideration when identifying viable alternatives and choosing the best course of action:

1. Any violation to her professional, industry specific, or company code of conduct?
2. Is it against the Law?
3. Does it correspond with her self-values such as honesty, responsibility, respect and compassion?
4. Can she disclose her decision to others openly and honestly without misgivings?

The ETHICS PLUS ethical decision making model might be helpful for her in solving the ethical dilemma and choosing the best course of action.

The plant engineer might contravene the Rules of Conduct of the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers if he concealed his personal interest in the supplier's company and secured business for the supplier who might not be the best capable service provider for his company.

Both the plant engineer and the supplier might violate Section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (POBO) if the partnership, which could be an advantage under the POBO, was offered and accepted without the permission of the electronic product manufacturer.

Although entertainment is common in business practice, the plant engineer should avoid accepting excessive entertainment that may affect his objectivity in discharging duties.   He should also check whether his company has any policy on the acceptable level of hospitality offered by contractors/vendors to prevent any conflicts of interest or the potential for such a conflict.