DRAFT LETTER
E! 449.
In discussions with you here in September and since then, we
have had some exchanges on the question of an amnesty for communist
prisoners as a possible gesture towards China which might help to
encourage a return to more normal relations. As you know, we have
not taken action on these lines because of doubts we have felt about
the timing of such a step, its effect on public opinion in Hong Kong
and its value in influencing the attitude of the C.P.G.
For our
part we have suggested that it might be advisable to wait for the
C.P.G. to indicate what kind of face saving gesture they would
require of us (our Tel. No. 2579 of 18 December refers).
In these exchanges you mentioned (paragraph 3 of your telegram
No. 1501 of 7 October) that "an amnesty would be legally possible
here in the case of convicted prisoners by virtue of the Royal
Prerogative of Parliament" and you commented that "the obvious
objection to this is that it is in a sense interfering with the
rule of law (and the decision of the Courts) for short term political
advantage".
Admittedly to use the power of free pardon to release communist
wrong doers whose systematic acts of violence are so fresh in the
minds of the public might well produce a strong sense of shock,
even outrage, in public opinion in Hong Kong. It might be less
objectionable (though obviously less acceptable to the CPG) to
release them on some conditional basis. In this connection we have
taken legal advice on the meaning of "a pardon subject to lawful
conditions" in Article XV of the Hong Kong Letters Patent and the
short answer is that this power could not by itself be used for the
kind of conditional release we had in mind. I attach a copy of
the Opinion of one of our legal advisers.
With these considerations in mind LordShepherd has suggested
that your attention should be drawn to provisions in the U.K.
Criminal Justice Act 1967 for
/ (a).