Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words.

I refer to your report, “Hong Kong police call to criminalise bid-rigging in wake of Tai Po estate blaze” (May 15).

It brought to light a serious gap in Hong Kong’s governance framework. It was surprising to learn that bid-rigging is not a criminal offence here but only a civil violation under the Competition Ordinance. This approach, which stands in contrast to that in many advanced economies, is extremely alarming.

The concern is straightforward: when penalties are limited to fines, they become a weak deterrent compared to the profits that collusion can generate. Estate maintenance projects have been particularly vulnerable given their high contract values. The absence of criminal liability has created conditions where exploitation was not only possible but, in some cases, rational from a business perspective.

This is not a theoretical risk as Hong Kong has already seen multiple cases where contractors colluded to manipulate tenders. Investigations by the Independent Commission Against Corruption and the Competition Commission in the past nine months uncovered bid-rigging schemes worth hundreds of millions of dollars, revealing collusion across projects covering dozens of housing estates. These cases show how ineffective penalties have allowed exploitation to flourish, and they are only the cases that were uncovered. It is reasonable to suspect many more cases remain undiscovered.

International comparisons highlight how far behind Hong Kong lags. A small number of countries rely primarily on civil or administrative penalties. Their experience suggests that fines alone do not provide sufficient deterrence, and collusion can persist until stronger measures are introduced.