Secondly, Mr and Mrs Harris refer to the case of
Mr Findlay. I do not accept Mr and Mrs Harris statement.
that Mr Findlay was relegated The facts are that in
March 1990 the Judicial Services Commission in Hong Kong decided not to recommend Mr Findlay as a High Court Judge. He then returned to the Legal Department with the
rank of Law Officer and in December 1990 he became
Law Draftsman, an important Law Officer rank post. I am advised that this was not relegation!
Thirdly, as regards the position of
Christopher Harris, his appeal was dismissed in September 1990 by the Court of Appeal in Hong Kong. The Privy Council also refused him leave to appeal. due for release on 30 September this year.
Mr Harris is
Mr and Mrs Harris are critical of the Attorney General's role in relation to their son's case. It is standing practice that in cases involving a member of the Legal Department, the advice of a respected outside lawyer is sought on whether a prosecution should be brought. In the Harris case, the advice of the person consulted was initially that Mr Harris should not be prosecuted. The Attorney General followed this impartial advice. Subsequently, after the case became public knowledge, the outside lawyer was again consulted: he then recommended that Mr Harris should be prosecuted. Once again the Attorney General followed this impartial advice.