The long waiting list for public rental housing (PRH) is an issue of great public concern in Hong Kong. Adding to the grim mood of PRH applicants is the inability of the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) to solve the problem of PRH tenancy abuse in this crowded city. In his latest Policy Address, Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu said the HKHA will launch the Cherish Public Housing Resources Award Scheme next month to offer rewards to residents who provide concrete intelligence that leads to identification of substantiated tenancy abuse of PRH.

The reward system has reinforced the perception that the current self-report system is far from satisfactory. PRH tenants are required to make declarations every two years that they have continuously resided in the units and complied with the terms of the tenancy agreement regarding occupied status after admission to PRH. The self-report system is built on the foundation of honesty. In recent years, the self-report system has stirred up a storm of controversy in Hong Kong.

Under the existing “well-off tenant policies”, if tenants own a residential property in Hong Kong, have a household income exceeding five times the current public housing income limit, or have total assets exceeding 100 times the current public housing income limit, or fail to declare their income and assets as required, they will be required to move out of their current public housing units. In theory, the self-report system, together with the “well-off tenant policies”, seems feasible and can save a lot of administrative and investigative fees. In practice, the government has still failed to clear the self-report system of the entrenched labels of injustice.

READ MORE: CE's duty visit seen boosting economy, freer flow of goods, talent

As the American philosopher John Rawls has correctly pointed out, in a well-ordered society, the public knowledge that citizens generally have an effective sense of justice is a very great social asset. In reality, no one can relax under the illusion that he or she is living in a well-ordered and high-trust society. It would be a pity, even an unconscionable deal for other PRH applicants, if dishonest PRH tenants were to exploit the loopholes of the flawed self-report system by making false declarations or engaging in illegal activities inside their units.

Promoting moral education within and beyond the classroom is the best way to foster an effective sense of justice among local residents in the long run. In the short run, however, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government has no alternative but to strengthen its efforts to combat PRH tenancy abuse. Some critics argue that the controversial reward system will undermine mutual trust among PRH tenants. Under a worst-case scenario, it will bring the entire neighborhood to the precipice of confrontation. The government should balance the deterrent value of the reward system against its potential risk of dividing the community.

The number of PRH flats recovered by the HKHA due to tenancy abuse and breach of tenancy agreement or housing policies over the last two years adds up to 5,000. The seriousness of the problem demands decisiveness, and justice cannot be delayed. Those who have knowingly made false declarations may be prosecuted.

The following information may help our readers gain a better understanding of the seriousness of the problem of PRH tenancy abuse. Common abuse cases include: non-occupation of the PRH units for over three months, subletting, engaging in illegal activities inside the premises, nondomestic usage (e.g., storage), and false declarations. If the abuse is of a more serious nature, the HKHA will terminate the tenancy concerned without prior warning. Hopes have been raised that the HKHA will step up efforts to combat PRH tenancy abuse.

The Hong Kong Housing Society (HKHS), a nongovernmental organization, has also kept a watchful eye on the problem of tenancy abuse in its housing estates. According to Sanford Poon Yuen-fong, director for property management of the HKHS, the society has reclaimed 93 units from tenants who have abused the system over the past five years.

ALSO READ: Housing policy must strike balance between reasonable price and high quality

Both the HKHA and HKHS shall not push too far against the privacy-protecting guardrails erected by the Basic Law, the Bill of Rights Ordinance and the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance. The limitations imposed on covert surveillance are also set out in the Interception of Communications and Surveillance Ordinance. It is no doubt desirable that residents in PRH can play an informal role in providing useful intelligence that can lead to identification of substantiated tenancy abuse.

Laying down clear guidelines to regulate the investigative process, the designers of the reward system should provide strong disincentives against false intelligence and malicious allegations. A loose fact-checking process will do nothing for the credibility of the reward system. Investigators should act impartially and comply with the Code of Conduct for Investigators. The relationship between the alleged abusers and whistleblowers should also be investigated. It is an unconscionable act to abuse the PRH tenancy system; it is another to abuse the reward system.

Henry Ting is vice-chairman of Chinese Dream Think Tank.

Kacee Ting Wong is a barrister, a part-time researcher of Shenzhen University Hong Kong and the Macao Basic Law Research Center, chairman of Chinese Dream Think Tank, and a district councilor.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.