IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/lawarc/4vpd7_v1.html

Sentencing Disparity in Hong Kong's Corruption Regime: A Case Study of the 2026 Ho Siu-tung Police Bribery Case

Author

Listed:
  • Hui, Ruilam

Abstract

This project contains a legal research paper examining sentencing principles in Hong Kong's corruption regime through the high-profile case of Ho Siu-tung, a Chief Inspector of Police who was sentenced to thirty months imprisonment for accepting over HK$1.14 million in bribes from a businessman. The paper analyzes the legal framework governing corruption offences in Hong Kong, compares the Ho case with other corruption cases involving law enforcement officers, and examines personal mitigation factors including the defendant's exceptional career trajectory, his mother's cancer diagnosis, and his loss of housing and retirement benefits. The paper argues that while the court properly balanced aggravating and mitigating factors, the case exposes tensions in sentencing between deterrence and rehabilitation for high-ranking public officials who fall from grace.

Suggested Citation

  • Hui, Ruilam, 2026. "Sentencing Disparity in Hong Kong's Corruption Regime: A Case Study of the 2026 Ho Siu-tung Police Bribery Case," LawArchive 4vpd7_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:lawarc:4vpd7_v1
    DOI: 10.31228/osf.io/4vpd7_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6a9587f112da3095bffb8ae2/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31228/osf.io/4vpd7_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:lawarc:4vpd7_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://lawarchive.info/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.