Rhodri Davies QC, counsel appearing in The Times and The Sunday Times before Lord Justice Leveson on his advisers and six (report, May 15), complained that Robert Jay QC, counsel to the Leveson inquiry acted "against the rules" for a public inquiry into making statements of a witness (Rupert Murdoch) after giving evidence at the inquiry. I know of no rule that defines the role and function of lawyers is responsible for submitting the name of a public inquiry. Investigations Act 2005 (in which Lord Justice Leveson conducts research) provides in Article 17 that the procedure and the conduct of the investigation "must be such that the Chair may order" and any decision he or she "must act fairly." if - what appears to be the case - Mr. Jay was but a spokesman for Lord Justice Leveson and an opinion expressed by the prosecutor of the court could question the impartiality of the survey
But in my experience to lead and participate in public consultations, the lawyer of the court always has a discretion as to how it fulfills its task of providing the testimony of witnesses and observations to assist the process of obtaining the true facts considered. Counsel for Mr Rhodri Davies QC appears as a 'key player' Lord Justice Leveson to exercise their right to a hearing to answer the criticisms of Mr. Jay (if applicable). It is quite right. But Mr Davies is, in my opinion, wrong to protest Mr. Jay acting inappropriately.
Louis Blom-Cooper QC
Find best price for : --fair----Rhodri----Robert----Leveson----Justice----Lord----Sunday----Times----Davies--
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น