2. BEFORE I CAME AWAY, WE HAD ALL BEEN CONCENTRATING OUR ATTENTION ON FUNDAMENTALS (PARA 6 OF OUR TELNO 279). WE HAVE NOT CONSIDERED 4 MODALITIES AT OUR END, RUSHFORD HAS REASONABLY SAID THAT HE WOULD EXPECT THE FILES TO ARRIVE WITH A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION FOR THE INVOCATION OF CR 55 BASED ON A HONG KONG CONSIDERATION OF THE FILES IN CIVIL SERVICE BRANCH, WHICH WOULD ACCORD WITH THE PROCEDURE IN THE CASE OF OTHER CR CASES. OF COURSE SOMEONE IN HONG KONG HAS TO BE QUOTE CONVINCED OF THE GUILT UNQUOTE OF EACH OFFICER, AND OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE IN CIVIL SERVICE BRANCH WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. I HAD SOME TIME ON THE PLANE TO THINK ABOUT THESE ASPECTS FOR THE FIRST TIME. SPEED IS OF THE ESSENCE. ONE WAY WOULD BE FOR A CIVIL SERVICE BRANCH EXERCISE TO PROCEED CONCURRENTLY WITH AN EXAMINATION OF FILES HERE, THOUGH THIS WOULD NOT MEET RUSHFORD'S POINT ABOUT A FORMAL CONSIDERED RECOMMENDATION FROM US AS THE FIRST STEP, OR THEY COULD BE PROCESSED IN HONG KONG
IN BATCHES AND FORWARDED HEAR SO THAT EACH BATCH COULD BE PROCESSED ON RECEIPT. STEWART DID NOT TAKE A POSITION TODAY, BUT THIS IS BECAUSE I HAVE URGED HIM AND RUSHFORD FIRST TO READ THE SAMPLE FILES SO THAT THEY WILL HAVE A FEEL OF THE TYPE OF CASE
WITH WHICH WE ARE DEALING.
3.
SHALL BE GLAD TO HAVE YOUR VIEWS BEFORE TUESDAY NEXT, AND IN PARTICULAR TO KNOW WHETHER I CAN HELP IN ANY WAY.
OWEN
NNNN
རྣམ་མ་