Annex 151
Letter to the Parliamentary Commissioner
for Standards from Finers Stephens Innocent, Solicitors
We write further to your faxed letter of 21
June.
With the greatest respect, you have not replied
to my client's questions relating to Sir Peter Soulsby, as set
out in our letters of 9, 16 and 21 June 2000. As we set out in
our letter of 21 June, Sir Peter Soulsby's motives and involvement
in this matter are of course of great concern to our client and
also highly relevant. You will in the light of a conflict of evidence
between Mr Kapasi and Sir Peter Soulsby choose between them. If
you have an interest in relation to Sir Peter Soulsby from past
dealings with him, then that should have been declared. Your impartially
in this matter is of course paramount to the credibility and validity
of your enquiry and the process you undertake.
Our client is most concerned that you are deliberately
withholding this information from him for some reason and you
will appreciate therefore, that his original hesitancy in meeting
with you, has only been exacerbated.
He has no wish to be deliberately unhelpful
to Parliament or to its enquiry, but is also concerned that as
an independent third party, there are no rules or regulations
which govern how he will be dealt with and he is most concerned
not to be unnecessarily dragged into a matter where there is no
protection for him.
He has taken the step of preparing a statutory
declaration setting out his position which we now enclose. As
this sets out his understanding of the matter in full, we trust
this should be sufficient for your purposes. We should be grateful
if you would kindly acknowledge receipt of the enclosure to this
letter.
26 June 2000
| 
