insurmountable
difficulties in collecting overseas evidence as
it would be impossible for me or any other defendant
to cross-
examine any witnesses in an informed manner or at all. In this
connection, it was admitted by Leading Counsel for the Hong Kong
government during the remand hearing before Magistrate
in Hong Kong on 4th December 1990 that:-
Sinclair
"
one
where
of the things that the parties want to know, there is evidence gathering in another country, is precisely what charges they are going to be charged with, because of course there has to be the taking of evidence upon depositions, and cross-examination must in fact be directed to the charges, because the difficulty in a case like this is determining precisely what the charges are going to be in a joint trial
of the defendants hasn't yet been returned-- two
one
of
("LEO 1", pages 4-6).
when them"
have
could at all material times
(2) The Hong Kong government
applied for new Letters of Request in place of the
1985 Letter of Request, but has not done so. The fact that the
Hong Kong government has, by refusing to inform me of the charges
it
any
intends to proceed with, disabled itself from collecting
evidence in Malaysia upon any Letter of Request is amply
demonstrated by the fact that it has failed even to act upon the
1988 Letter of Request notwithstanding that it was obtained more
than two years ago and that it related to the collection of oral
testimony from two important Malaysian witnesses, namely, Ariffin
and Nawawi.
(3) In any event, I am advised and verily believe that
reliance upon the 1985 Letter of Request is
continued
its
misplaced
10