he has personally benefited;
that on 1st June, 1987, after a
protracted hearing the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate found there
was a case for Mr. Osman to answer and made a committal order;
that if it had not been for the unprecedented series of habeas
corpus applications, the present is the eighth, each of which has
been wholly unsuccessful, he would have been returned to stand
trial in Hong Kong hlong ago; that now not to return Mr. Osman
to stand trial in Hong Kong would create a most undesirable
precedent;
it would mean that by conducting a wholly
unmeritorious campaign in the courts here and abroad he was able
first to delay and then to defeat the responsibilities which this
country owes to the Government of Hong Kong to return to Hong
Kong for trial those against whom a prima facie case of an
appropriate offence is established.
Because of the previous proceedings which have already taken
place, it is not necessary to give more than a bare outline of
the case against Mr. Osman. It is that between December 1979 and
October 1983, when he was the Non-Executive Chairman of Bumiputra
3