From:
Sir David Wilson, KCMG
(viii)
香港 督府
1
GOVERNMENT HOUSE
HONG KONG
PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL
20 February 1988
Mr Justice Barker
I have been reflecting over the holiday period on the case of Mr Justice Barker. We need to reach a conclusion soon. At present you and Sir T L Yang offer different advice on how to proceed. I feel that I must ask you both to give me a further considered opinion before I can reach a conclusion on how to proceed.
To get one point out of the way, I suggest that we should now disregard the "radio shop" allegation. There is no conclusive evidence to support the allegation. Both Mr Justice Barker and Mr Rogerio Lam deny that it took place.
the
That leaves us essentially where we started: serious allegations made by Lord Benson (also repeated in varying forms by the Far Eastern Economic Review, Target and a number of private conversations or letters). In summary Lord Benson's allegations centre on the following points:
(i)
(ii)
Unfitness. The allegation that Mr Justice Barker was not fit to preside during the Carrian trial and, by implication, may still not be fit to perform his duties as a result of either poor health or excessive intake of alcohol.
Incompetence.
The allegation that Mr Justice Barker failed to conduct the Carrian trial properly because of:
:
The Hon Sir Denys Roberts KBE
The Chief Justice
Chief Justice's Chambers
Supreme Court
Hong Kong
/(a)
PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL