From this issue, Complaints Prevention Committee members will contribute a series of articles to enhance communication. Frontline officers can also express their feelings and share their experiences in these articles. Our debut piece below is from an officer attached to Traffic Hong Kong Island.

It happened before the handover in 1997, while I was attached to Traffic Hong Kong Island Enforcement and Control Division.

About 1 am one morning, I was performing traffic enforcement duties with a colleague in Marsh Road when my colleague informed me of a taxi that allegedly picked up a passenger in the restricted zone. I stopped the driver and told him the alleged offence he committed. He denied it and his passenger concurred. Believing the taxi driver had committed the offence, I still issued a ticket.

The case was tried several months later and in the absence of a main prosecution witness, the taxi driver was acquitted. I thought the matter was settled, although I was unsatisfied with the result.

Two weeks later the Complaints Against Police Office informed me that the driver had accused me of neglect of duty and using abusive language - I was very upset. After an investigation, the first allegation was found to be unsubstantiated due to the lack of evidence. The second allegation was also unsubstantiated because the defence witness, the taxi passenger, proved my innocence.

What impressed me most in this whole incident was that the passenger, who I thought sided with the taxi driver, eventually helped me out and did me justice. Looking back dispassionately upon the incident, I feel I could have done better. Since there was an independent witness concurring with the suspected offender, the benefit of doubt should have been given to the defendant. Given the circumstances of the case, I should not have issued the ticket.

<< Back to Index >>