IT LOOKS like an ordinary office building in central Hong Kong. But on an upper floor, along a corridor of shiny grey linoleum, there are 17 cramped rooms, each equipped with a table, chair and bed made of white plastic, and secured with a stout lock.
These are prison cells, and the occasional inhabitants are people being investigated for bribery and extortion by one of the most powerful and feared bodies in Hong Kong, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (lCAC).
Now a relatively clean city, Hong Kong used to be a byword for graft, and there is much speculation that its return to China, where bribery and political nepotism are prevalent, will mean a return to the bad old days. And they really were bad.
"Corruption was so rampant that in the public sector it was womb-to-tomb, and in the private sector all Hong Kong operated on a commission basis," said Mr Tony Kwok, lCAC head of operations.
One of the first to expose themiasma of corruption was the journalist, Leo Goodstadt, later to become senior British policy adviser. He shocked complacent colonial officials in 1970 with an article in the Far Eastern Economic Review headlined, "Squeeze is a way of life in Hong Kong
The police squeezed the hardest. An ICAC official showed me the thick loose-leaf account books which were used by a former senior Hong Kong police officer, Peter Godber, to type his weekly take from beauty parlours, coffee shops, gambling joints and even ordinary home owners. In 1973, when Godber was found to be sending huge sums abroad, he fled to England, causing such a scandal that Governor MacLehose set up the independent commission. Godber was brought back, tried and imprisoned.
The depth of institutionalised corruption was so great that in one month alone the new anti-graft body arrested 174 police officers, including three British superintendents. The Hong Kong police force was in turmoil. Some marched on ICAC headquarters, smashed in the doors and threw a few punches. Hong Kong almost descended into anarchy.
Hong Kong in those days corrupted China, according to Mr Hugh Davies, Britain's representative on the Sino-British Joint Liaison Group. When China opened up in the 1980s, Hong Kong businessmen came to Beijing, bringing new TV sets and cars as presents, he recalled in a Hong Kong newspaper article. "China was relatively uncorrupted for a period under communism," he wrote. "It was unfortunately Hong Kong influence which reintroduced bribery and corruption there."
"Now the big question is will corruption increase after China takes over?" asked Mr Kwok, referring to international concerns that Hong Kong could be undermined as a successful business and finance centre by the very poison it injected into China.
"We don't think so," he said, answering his own question. "Hong Kong is regarded as one of the cleanest cities in the world. There is no reason why our team of professionals with 23 years experience cannot keep it that way. We have top government support. We have an annual budget of 607 million Hong Kong dollars (£50 million). We have a strong legal framework. All the critical success factors will continue."
One of these is immense power. The ICAC can inspect any institution, public or private, look at any bank account, and hold suspects without trial. It has a room with two-way mirrors where accusers can point the finger anonymously at a suspect in a line-up. It has a computerised intelligence network with information on everyone accused of taking, offering or soliciting a kickback or bribe, or living beyond their means. It can arrest someone for having more money than they should.
Every complaint made to its 700 investigators, 49 of them British, is logged, and if the ICAC refuses to follow up a complaint, an oversight committee of citizens can order it to do so. Last year it investigated 2,214 cases and instigated 393 prosecutions.
The Hong Kong graft-busters have begun co-operating with their counterparts in China who, Mr Kwok said, "are very professional and have a sense of mission". With the change of sovereignty he expected even closer co-operation.