628 / 736
disclosure of evidence or submission of evidence
in writing.
SWISS
COURT LIFTS BANK SECRECY
The Swiss Supreme Court has ruled that the
Swiss Federal tax administration can supply in
formation to the United States Government con
cerning
the dealings with Swiss banks of an
American citizen suspected of tax fraud.
The ruling, just made public, said that if the
information could be legally obtained under Swiss
law
the Swiss administration was
obliged
to
accede to a request for the same information from
the American internal revenue service.
In its ruling the court rejected an appeal by an
American, not identified in the report against a
decision of the Swiss tax authorities to supply
information requested by Washington concerning
his dealings with a Swiss bank.
Swiss bank secrecy protects a bank's client
against routine prying by the authorities for tax
evasion, the court said. However, under Swiss
law the court explained, the secrecy can be lifted
in the more serious matter of tax fraud.
The obligation under the treaty with the U.S.
covers not only cases where fraud has been leg
ally established, but also cases where requested
information could help forestall or detect a fraud,
it was stated.
Negotiations are now in a final stage between
the United States and Switzerland on an agree
ment which would permit the lifting of the 1934
bank secrecy law to help fight organised crime.
(The Irish Times,
4 January 1971)
"DAILY TELEGRAPH MAGAZINE"
Three Supplements of
the Daily Telegraph
Magazine on March 6th; March 13'th and March
20th, 1970 contain some interesting articles re
lating to the law. They include such articles as —
Justice: Is It Fact Or Fiction? Where it is sug
gested that the chief struggle is between the Law
and the Administration, and the Administration
seems to be winning. Lord Devlin suggests that to
accelerate cases, there is no reason why the judge
should not have the bulk of 'the case presented to
him in writing, and confine the oral hearing to
the pith; injunctions by the judge not to waste
time are not consistently availed of.
In an Anthology of Injustice, Barry Cox sets
out no less than 14 cases of glaring injustice.
Fenton Breslen repeats the phrases of Lord Atkin
in 1942 and Lord Simonds in 1947 — "Arrested
with or without warrant, the citizen is entitled to
know why he is deprived of his freedom .
.
.
."
The modern judge eschews politics — he tries
to stay out of it.
Only Lord Denning, Lord
Justices Salmon and Danckwerth, and Mr. Justice
Donaldson have dared to probe and question the
powers of Whitehall and Town Hall.
Strong
Judges can still, when they wish to, make good
law and protect the citizen. But one has to look
to find them.
Desmond Donnelly suggests there are too many
members in Westminster, and that the process
of legislation would be simplified by reducing
them by hah0, he suggests that only major matters
should be dealt with at Westminster, and that
housing, health, education and law and order
should be confined
to
small elected
regional
parliaments who would have power to levy local
taxes — Ben Whitaker mentions inconsistencies
in the legal system, such as bias in favour of the
richest members of the community. He advocates
the following reform: —
1.
Legal aid should be granted against de
cisions of social welfare tribunals which
affect the citizen even more than the law
courts.
2. To prevent exploitation, a new form of
neighbourhood
legal
service
should
be
established particularly in areas where there
are no solicitor's offices is essential.
3. Legal documents available to the public
should be in simple language.
4.
It should not be necessary to foster restric
tive practices by employing a junior as
well as a senior counsel.
5. A non-legal Minister for Justice might con
sider the claims of academics or business
men with legal training for judicial appoint
ment.
6.
The training of lawyers and judges needs
to be constantly revised to keep pace with
modern requirements.
168