ATTACHMENT "B"
QUESTIONS TO THE HOME SECRETARY
A.
The prosecution's unreasonable delay in preparing its case
(1)
(2)
(3)
Does the Hong Kong Government contest that the earliest realistic date by which the Prosecution would be ready to start Mr. Osman's trial would be some time in 1994?
Why did the prosecution not follow the normal established practice and seek to interview Mr. Osman in connection with the alleged offences at any time during the four to five years between the moment when the alleged offences came to light and Mr. Osman's first application for Habeas Corpus began?
Can the Prosecution satisfy the Home Secretary that it is able to secure a safe and fair conviction :
(a) in view of the passage of eleven to fifteen years
between the commission of the alleged offences and any trial, and
(b) where much of the documentation has been lost by the bank that laid the original complaint against him.
B. Proved untrustworthiness of Prosecution chief witness
(1)
(2)
Was
the unusually wide immunity granted to Jaafar corrupt?
Can the prosecution of Mr. Osman in Hong Kong result in a safe conviction in the light of the findings of Judge Liu and Judge Barker that Jaafar is a self-confessed conspirator who has accepted bribes and has told lies repeatedly in court, and in the light of the finding of the English courts that without Jaafar's testimony the case against Mr. Osman must fail?
C. Reluctance of Malaysian witnesses to attend trial in Hong Kong
(1)
a
Can the prosecution of Mr. Osman in Hong Kong result in safe conviction since many of the Malaysian witnesses, including witnesses from the complainant BBMB, have indicated that they are unwilling to attend any trial in Hong Kong where they could be cross- examined in front of the jury?
1
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.