Date:
5.12.90
Time:
Reporter:
11.45 a.m.
JPM/18
12.02 p.m.
1
2
3
In
5
6
understood it clearly, I am concerned about the Malaysian evidence-gathering exercise referred to by Mr Nicholls yesterday and by yourself today. Do I understand that it is commonly agreed
agreed that the Crown relies upon the evidence in
Malaysia and getting the evidence from these witnesses in Malaysia, to found the BMFL prosecution against Mr Tan?
Perhaps I can answer that, the
"Yes", that is right otherwise we would not have
asked you to attend. The other points if I can just say that,
are this.
7
8
MR NICHOLLS:
9
answer is
10
11
(12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 2 2 2
21
22
23
We maintain that we were right in collecting that evidence back
in 1988, and you will appreciate the Judge there ruled
effectively that it was proper for us to collect evidence or
that date in September,
indicated there would be
importantly, then it was
there was a stay, but we
right and we opposed the stay in
matter ΟΙ that appeal and the
arises.
but having made his ruling it wa:
an appeal against his ruling. Bu
asked that there should be a stay an
still maintain that we were in fac
may I say this, in th
prosecution of that appea
-
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
My friend criticises us and says
"Well, nothing has been do
about that", but with respect it is not our appeal, it is! Osman's and Mr Tan's appeal,
appeal, it is for them to put it befo
the Court and there is nothing we
endeavoured to try to get something done.
COURT:
that. can do about
We ha
That is how I did understand :
and Mr Hamilton suggested something definite about that!
32
33
MR NICHOLLS:
But
3+
eviderce in Malaysia and
as
we do
I have said,
depend upon t importantly for
35
reasons that we
cannot compel witnesses,
36
if we take
evidence, we cannot compel them but it must be taken in pro
VERBATIM REPORTERS
even
HONG KONG
3.
6 37 36 +6
8731167
Page 30Page 31
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.