Hong Kong, in a case involving a co-defendant, to be 14 years, although
in that case, it was discounted to 10 years because it was an Attorney
General's reference. A copy of the judgment in Attorney General -V-
Mohamed Hashim Shamsuddin is appended hereto as Appendix E.
16.
In these circumstances, we submit that it is not possible for the
Specialty Assurance to be honoured if Mr. Osman is extradited to Hong
Kong. Since such an assurance is fundamental to the law of extradition,
it is a most material consideration.
17.
Further, we would draw attention to the fact that the Specialty
Assurance does not now comply with section 6(4) of the EA because it
does not contain the exclusion provided for in section 6(5) of the EA.
This is apparent from an examination of these provisions and is a most
material consideration in the circumstances.
PREJUDICE AND UNFAIRNESS OF EVENTUAL TRIAL
18.
During the course of the 4th Application for Habeas Corpus, Mr. Osman's
solicitors, in preparation for his eventual trial in Hong Kong, sought
and obtained inspection of the documents
the documents which had previously been
produced to the Hong Kong Government on the basis
basis that they were
relevant to the committal proceedings against Mr. Osman in the Bow
Street Magistrates Court. As a result of the inspection, it was
discovered that some 65% of the 5,439 documents and/or files previously
produced to the Hong Kong Government were missing. This has never been
in dispute.