TNAG-2389-FCO40-3471-Extradition-from-the-UK-to-Hong-Kong-case-of-Lorrain-Esme-Os-1991 — Page 63

-9-

to the full documentation

made, and transactions entered into, without access disclosed to the Crown under the 1986 Order. The fact that relevant documents

are missing prejudices

exercise the

of

my

full

to right

་

defend

myself. It must be emphasised that it was the HK Government's own lawyer who stated that it was "essential and crucial in the interest of justice" that there be inspection of documents in the categories set out in the 1986 Order. BBMB presumably considered the Order, Having decided

what to

documents it was required to

not to object

to

as

carefully its legal obligations

disclose.

27.

it is pertinent to keep in mind BBMB's extremely In this regard, it

extracts it considered the censoring of cautious position with regard to "irrelevant" or "confidential" from documents originally requested by the ICAC in 1985. Further, the negotiations between the HK Government and my lawyers, and BBMB and Bank Negara had failed precisely because of their paramount concern over the matter of confidentiality, leading to the necessity for the to assume that BBME 1986 Order. Against this background, it is reasonable

would have (and did in fact) exercise a high degree of care in its selection

of documents.

28.

In

the

that

BBMB

selected

thes fact very circumstances, the

I am advise documents for the 1986 inspection demonstrates their relevance.

that this was to be true,

the positio by Mr Krishnan, and verily believe which he submitted to the Court on 8th and 9th October 1990 in opposing BBMB' conter application and, in this respect, BBMB (through its counsel) did not otherwise. I am further advised by Mr. Krishnan (and verily believe it to t

that it was the Court

an unreasonab

had selected the: 4 which

true) that he further submitted

proposition

to

for BBMB,

the party

years

ago

documents, to suggest that I, who had never seen them myself, had the burd

of proving their relevance.'

THE ALLISON "SELECTED" DOCUMENTS.

1

29.

From what I shall call, the "relevant universe", Mr Allison exercise‹ second level of discretion in determining which documents would be "materi:

In the letter of 12th December 1988 from for the committal proceedings. Attorney General's Chambers to M/s. Melville Boase & Co (pages 1-3 "LEO 1") was stated that in conducting his inspection, "Mr Allison took the view t he was under a duty to seek out, and require copies of, any information t

(36)