Charles Warwick Reid
Warwick Reid came to Hong Kong in 1975 from New Zealand and joined the Hong Kong Attorney General's Chambers as a Crown Counsel. He eventually worked his way up to Principal Crown Counsel and the Head of the Commercial Crime Unit.
To the shock of the Hong Kong legal community, Reid was arrested in October 1989 and suspended from duty. He was given bail and surrendered his passport as a condition but fled Hong Kong in December 1989. He then worked his way through Macau, China and then the Philippines before he was deported back in March 1990.
It was the start of chain of events which rocked Hong Kong and claimed that career of several solicitors in Hong Kong, including Oscar Lai, Alick Au and Eddie So.
In April 1990, he was charged under section 10(1)(b) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (i.e. being in control of unexplained pecuniary resources and property disproportionate to his official emoluments). He was offered immunity from further prosecution by the then Attorney General in May 1990 on terms that he pleaded guilty to the offence already charged and gave assistance in the case against others.
Reid pleaded guilty in the Magistrate's Court on 20 June 1990 and was sentenced at the High Court on 6 July 1990 to 8 years#39; imprisonment and ordered to pay some HK$12 million being the proceeds of his corruption. Upon a petition by Reid, the sentence was remitted by the Governor of Hong Kong to seven years (cf. In the Matter of Charles Warwick Reid, No. 149 of 1993).
Reid was released from custody on 29 November 1994 and flew back to New Zealand. On 2 December 1994, he signed an affidavit for use in a criminal case against the businessman Ch#39;ng Poh ("Poh"). For that he was allegedly paid NZ1 million. The affidavit was brought back to Hong Kong and given to the solicitor for Poh, a "Mr. A" described in the case bearing case number MP103 of 1996.
On 22 May 1996, the ICAC executed a search warrant and search the premises of "X & Co", a firm of solicitors under Section 10B of the Independent Commission against Corruption Ordinance. The ICAC took away documents relating to Poh. The warrant was issued based on the allegation made by Reid that while in Shiu Lam prison he was approached by Mr. A with an offer of payment if he, Reid, would swear an affidavit. The search warrant was quashed by the high court on 10 July 1996 on the ground that the offence alleged against Mr. A could not have fell under section 9 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance, as argued by the ICAC.
