JY
لذلك
葉錫恩
(MRS.) E. ELLIOTT.
TEL. 3- 422 41 4
Redacted
under FOI
exemption 40(2)
55. Kung Lok Road, Kwun Tong.
KOWLOON.
OUH
REF:
YOUR
والانا
ستعلاف
した。
100
REPT
12.
prosecuted for murder and robbery in a cinema on his own confession, gave a detailed account of the murder running into several pages; then it was discovered just before the trial was due to start that at the relevant time that the offences had been committed he was in fact in custody in one of the prisons. Yet again quite recently the Crown had to pay [a
the sum of about HK$80,000 in respect of a brutal assault on him by two member.of the C.I.D. which resulted in serious injuries to his spinal chord. His companion,
also received compensation. [Mr. O. Cheung, Q.C., and Mr. A. Sanguinetti conducted their defences] in the Lower Court in 1971, when they were both found guilty of "possession of dangerous drugs" and "having an offensive weapon for an unlawful purpose. The appeal was not contested by the Crown, and therefore allowed.
In the final analysis, the proposition of frame-ups is beyond doubt, since different people, completely unknown to each other, all averred to identical or similar techniques being used in their alleged frame-ups. Indeed the truth of this proposition as Your Excellency is well aware has been acknowledged in the setting up of a monitoring body of complaints against the police within UMELCO. From information supplied to me, however, and from my own observations of the working of the UMELCO group, there is not much point in a group monitoring complaints against the police, when the door is quite open to the police to supply wrong and misleading information to UMELCO. one recent instance, a case was reopened for this reason. my letter dated 16th April, 1978 to Your Excellency refers.) the charge was dismissed on appeal. (2nd May, 1978.)
as in Copy of
In fact,
•
cwillis
II. (a) The Legal System
mitted
LA
12.
Your Excellency will recollect that I wrote
to you the first of my letters on the 20th March, 1976 in connection with the state of the Judiciary, with particular emphasis on the Magisterial Courts; and needless to say I hasten to add that not all Magistrates' Courts come under the criticism then and now made, as there are many conscientious men, both Chinese and ex-patriates on the Bench at all levels, who are attempting to perform well a very difficult task indeed. Our visits to the penal institutions have only confirmed the views expressed at that time, and in fact,, in my opinion, the situation is getting worse and out of control. One does not want to be personal, particularly when the Head of the Judiciary is supposed to be retiring soon, but in fact a "laissez-faire" attitude operates throughout the whole of the Judiciary except in the cases of consciencious magistrates and Judges whom I have referred to. One of the main criticisms levelled at the Judiciary is that persons brought before the courts, whether on frame- up charges or otherwise, are in quite a number of cases bullied by some
Cont. Magistrates