A
B
C
D
E!
F
G
On 11th January 1991 there was an application for leave
to appeal against that decision to this court. There was
subsequently an application to the House of Lords. On 27th
February 1991 the House of Lords refused the application and
the very same day habeas corpus application number 5 was made
coupled with an application for judicial review.
Application number 5 was based primarily on the fact
that on 1st July 1997, as a result of a treaty which had been
made with the Government of the People's Republic of China,
Hong Kong would become a Special Administrative Region of the
Republic. It was contended, therefore, that the undertakings
which had been given by the Government of Hong Kong in the
extradition proceedings would not provide any protection for
Mr. Osman after 1st June 1997, that they should provide for
Mr. Osman, bearing in mind that if he were to be convicted in
Hong Kong he would be likely still to be in custody after
1997.
On 22nd May of this year that application was dismissed.
Although there were forceful arguments advanced on behalf of
the Government of Hong Kong that those proceedings were an
abuse of process, this court did not accept that they amounted
to an abuse. I would however emphasise that the court on
that occasion was looking at the proceedings which were then
before them and were not considering the proceedings as a
whole as I am seeking to do in the course of this judgment.
In his judgment, of which we have a transcript, at page
H
17