A corruption scandal has surfaced involving four individuals linked to the China Railway Fifteenth Bureau Group Co., Ltd., which has raised significant concerns about integrity within Hong Kong's construction sector. The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) initially charged Xu Wenwei, then Deputy General Manager of the company, for allegedly conspiring with subcontractors to accept bribes.
According to the ICAC, Xu Wenwei is accused of conspiring with Wu Guanxun, the operator of Hengjia Engineering Construction Co., Ltd., to secure HKD 2 million (approximately USD 250,000) as bribe money for facilitating the subcontracting process related to infrastructure projects around Tseung Kwan O. Despite this financial arrangement, Hengjia Engineering was unable to secure the contracts.
On March 3, 2025, the ICAC announced additional charges against two more individuals connected to the bribery scheme. Wu Guoxi, aged 74, who is the director and shareholder of Hengjia Engineering, and 47-year-old businessman Lai Waiqiang were charged with conspiracy to have Xu Wenwei accept the bribe. Both were granted bail, and their case is scheduled for mention on March 5, 2025, at the Eastern District Court.
Initially charged back in September 2024, Xu Wenwei was responsible for overseeing the contractor's engineering projects within Hong Kong. The case centers around allegations from 2022, when the China Railway Fifteenth Bureau was collaborating with another construction firm on land leveling and infrastructure projects. Xu represented the bureau on the project management committee, where he was tasked with reviewing applications and supervising related personnel. It was during this period of overseeing tender documents and contracts where suspicions of misconduct began to arise.
The scope of the investigation, as revealed by the ICAC, suggests significant collusion among the defendants between July and November 2022. They were reportedly conspiring to persuade Xu to accept the HKD 2 million bribe from Wu Guanxun to assist Hengjia Engineering with their bid for the subcontract. The ramifications of such actions raise broader questions about procurement practices and ethical standards at government construction projects.
Significantly, the ICAC indicated its findings suggest if Xu had not recommended Hengjia Engineering to the management board, the company likely would not have been considered for the bidding process. During the tendering period, Xu allegedly provided them with technical insights and advice, which was intended to improve their position, though their bid was not the lowest and they eventually failed to clinch the contract.
These developments have led to heightened scrutiny of the fairness and transparency of public sector contracting processes, with officials urging stricter compliance measures to prevent future occurrences of corruption. "The ICAC previously charged Xu Wenwei with conspiracy to have an agent accept an advantage, accusing him of accepting HKD 2 million bribe from the subcontractor," stated the ICAC. This reiteration indicates the commission's commitment to prosecuting corrupt practices rigorously.
The next court dates will bring together these significant allegations against individuals closely associated with major construction projects. Continuing discussions among legal experts, ethicists, and the general public will likely shape the responses from government authorities and professional organizations within the construction industry, eager to rebuild trust and integrity after these allegations of wrongdoing.
This case highlights the importance of ethical standards and accountability within the construction sector, impacting not just the accused, but the future of public procurement practices across Hong Kong. Thorough investigations by agencies like the ICAC are fundamental to maintaining transparency and integrity, as they strive to eradicate corruption from public service and contracts.
With the court proceedings upcoming, all eyes will be on the Eastern District Court as the public and various stakeholders await updates on this pivotal case, which holds the potential to reshape the perception and governance of construction-related authorities moving forward.