Read the full judgment text of HCMA 000709/1990 on BabelCite. This High Court CFI judgment was delivered on 18 October 1990.
1. The first appellant (D1) was convicted of six charges of accepting an advantage under S.. 9(1)(a) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance and the second appellant (D2) was convicted of six charges of offering an advantage under S. 9(2)(a) of the same ordinance. They how appeal against their respective convictions. D2 is represented by counsel. D1 acts in person and beyond relying on what D2's counsel says in submission insofar as it is also applicable to him, has nothing to say.