DURING an interview with the Governor of Hong Kong, Mr Chris Patten, in Hong Kong last month, I asked him why the director of immigration, Mr Laurence Leung Ming yin, had retired suddenly in July.
"For personal reasons," Mr Patten replied.
Why had he not paid tribute to him, I inquired. "I don't think I have paid lavish tributes to every departing civil servant," the Governor said dryly.
The mystery over the sudden retirement of Mr Leung, a top official in possession of highly sensitive information, has puzzled and intrigued Hong Kong for months, particularly as neither side would say what were the "personal reasons" for his departure.
On Thursday of last week Mr Leung dropped a bombshell. He disclosed he had in effect been fired. He had been summoned by the civil service chief, Mr Lam Woon kwong, on July 5th and asked to leave office because the government no longer trusted him.
Testifying to the Legislative Council in Hong Kong, he said there had been concerted efforts to dirty his name and this was why he was speaking out.
Hong Kong government officials deny trying to "rubbish" Mr Leung, as a Foreign Office spokesman, Mr Bill Dixon, put it.
Rumours are now sweeping Hong Kong about the possibility that the affair, which one legislator called Hong Kong's "Watergate", is connected to the Chinese takeover of Hong Kong this year.
Especially concerned are the approximately 50,000 Hong Kong citizens, many of them top civil servants, who have been secretly issued British passports to give them an "escape hatch" from communist rule.
The list is kept secret as the Chinese government insists that Hong Kong officials carry only the passport of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong after Britain leaves on June 30th.
Asked if the names could have leaked, Mr Patten said during the interview that "We have no reason at all to believe that a list of people with British passports has been handed over to the Chinese."
Mr Leung also denied giving sensitive information to the Chinese. Anyone taking immigration department information was recorded by a computer. "You can find out when exactly, which year, month, day, minute and second anyone has retrieved the information," he said.
He also denied a report that he had tried to give the job of printing Hong Kong passports to a pro Chinese firm, saying, "I was just a little civil servant and did not have the power to question it."
In his testimony, Mr Leung disclosed that he had been investigated by fraud officers before his abrupt departure from office. On October 1st, 1995, 10 officials had come to his home and office and seized documents and personal items. They told him his income was not compatible with his standard of living.
Mr Leung, who owns luxury apartments on the Peak and at Jardine's Lookout in Hong Kong with HK$22 million (approximately £1.8 million), said his money came from a one eighth share in his mother's fortune. He earned HK$152,150 a month (£13,000).
He also had business interests in Canada. He and his wife, Ms Kitty leung Yeung Shuk ching, were directors of a family company, Fortune Score Ltd.
The immigration director, whose daughter Sylvia (22) was killed in a crossbow murder in Vancouver, Canada, in 1993, said he was officially cleared of corruption in April 1996.
Under questioning in the legislature, Mr Leung admitted that he had met a Chinese government official, Mr Chen Zuo'er, just after he quit, in a Hong Kong coffee shop. He said the meeting was of no substance and this was why he did not report it as was the practice.
Mr Leung said that he did not know why he had been ousted. He had been told by Mr Lam if he did not resign immediately measures would be taken to force him out, as the government did not trust him any more. He asked why and was told: "You should know."
Mr Lam confirmed that Mr Leung "chose to retire" after being told he might be asked to do so.
The affair is becoming a major embarrassment for Mr Patten. By refusing to go into detail about the reason for Mr Leung's departure, the Governor is undermining his case that China should conduct open government in the territory after the handover.
The South China Morning Post said the impression left after Mr Leung's testimony and Mr Lam's reply was that of "men hiding behind words and formulaic responses". It accused the administration of "continued stone walling in what is becoming a major crisis for the Governor."
Without a categorical statement of what Mr Leung was accused of, "it is perfectly logical for the public to worry, for instance, that their personal details may have been made available to China or their privacy otherwise compromised".
The Hong Kong media predict more revelations in the near future. Mr Lam will be asked to attend another hearing into the matter on January 23rd, and Mr Patten will also face questions in the Legislative Council. In London the Governor commented: "In the next few days we may have more to say."