7. In these two applications, serious and numerous allegations have been made against the Chairman of the Tribunal, Mr Justice Yam, and counsel for the enquiry, Mr Peter Davies. Their conduct, it is said, has broken elementary rules of fairness not only to those implicated but also to the public. Large portions of the inquiry have been held in secret. In other words, nobody knew about them and they were never disclosed. Their existence has only been known for a few months. It is submitted that the Chairman has disregarded the important principle of open justice and has provided a result so flawed that it should be quashed...
9. My general conclusions are as follows...
... From the conclusion of the public hearings in August 1996, the Tribunal received evidence which was never disclosed to the parties and he secretly evaluated the evidence with counsel until the end of the year.
... When the Tribunal began to write the report, it secretly received comments from counsel and evidence from some parties.
... The Tribunal in effect conducted an inquiry which breached the basic rules of fairness and openness and although the Chairman was warned about his unusual procedures, he nevertheless continued with them.The procedural irregularities are so numerous that I do not consider it necessary to identify them all. The degree of unfairness was substantial. The worse aspect to this sorry saga was that what should have been a public inquiry became instead a private and secret hearing between the Tribunal and its counsel...
... a reading of the minutes demonstrates to my mind that Mr Peter Davies was being very conservative with the truth...
(R.A.W. Sears)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court
(Source: http://www.hklii.hk/cgi-bin/sinodisp/eng/hk/cases/hkcfi/1998/29.html?stem=&synonyms=&query=Dato%20Tan%20Leong%20Min)
Judge of the Court of First Instance
High Court
沒有留言:
張貼留言