Page
three/Osman.
I do not need to remind you that public confidence in the judicial
systems is currently under very heavy strain.
Nonetheless, not one of the cases causing contention ever exhibited
so absolute a pattern of corruption and bad faith as does the
case of Lorrain Osman
I have said that the High Court has been wholly unbalanced in
deciding between the constitutional right to innocence and the
rights of the prosecution in this case. I will go further.
The High Court granted a certificate of Public Interest Immunity
to certain FCO cables, which state, in the clearest possible way, that
the case is political, brought for political reasons. The cables
say this and recount both the role of the jailed DDPP and of other
officials, in setting up and 'arranging' the prosecution. The PIIC
effectively prevents those documents, despite their central and
material relevance to the case, from being used as evidence, either
here or in Hong Kong.
On five seperate occassions the High Court has had a chance to
examine the totality of corruption in the prosecution. Each time
the Court has ignored, totally, Mr Osman's prior constitutional
right, and has sided wholly with a corrupt prosecution. In addition, I
say, and I say because I have the FCO cables, that the High Court
has gone further. It has actually enabled the corrupt prosecution
to hide materaål evidence, from any court and from any trial that
may take place.
In attempting to dece de what are the interests of justice in
a case, the High Court must balance many things. The problem is
that over time, and on every occasion, the High Court has decided
in the Osman case, in only one direction, a direction that has been
exposed as virtually wholly corrupt, politicised and seriously
tainted.