'MAY 14 '92 19:55 CLIFFORD CHANCE HK 852 8104708
P.1
70.
18
history of the BMFL investigation. I referred to expert banking evidence. I clearly set out Saniman's position in BMFL and BBMB.
(Annexure "D)
I also qualified the offences of escroquerie and identified clearly the new
facts.
Second Meeting with Advocat Général – 16.11.88
71.
72.
73.
On the 16th of November 1988 during the course of the Osman proceedings in the Divisional Court (UK2) I met with M. Chauvy again in Paris. M. Chauvy inquired about the Osman proceedings in UK. I advised him that Osman's first appeal to the Divisional Court had been rejected and the Magistrate's ordered to return him to face his trial in Hong Kong confirmed. I told M. Chauvy that Osman was now claiming diplomatic immunity (Liberian diplomat) in the Divisional Court. I also advised him that Mr. Osman had been unsuccessful in the Privy Council in attempting to appeal a decision of the Hong Kong Court of Appeal rejecting his attack the
upon Governor's request for his extradition (1997 point). M. Chauvy advised me he had reviewed the documentation in greater detail and was uncertain whether the offences of complicity of escroquerie and abus de confiance were committed by Saniman against BMFL or BBMB. I explained that both BMFL and BBMB were victims in the fraud.
M. Chauvy said he did not quite understand the position of Jafaar within BMFL. He said the French translation used the term "directeur géneral" which was somewhat confusing and could describe a director on the board rather than a member of management.
I explained that Jafaar was merely a member of the management and not a member of the Board of Directors of BMFL. Accordingly he was subject to
}