:
Sir A. Grattan-Bellew
Mr. Huijsman
33
1
?
The Minister told Mr. Jenkin at (31) that he could not give the reasons why he reached his decision in this case, mentioning the security considerations involved. Mr. Jenkin now asks for a personal discussion "on an entirely confidential basis", hinting that unless the Minister "can be more forthcoming" he will feel bound to give the case some publicity.
2.
It would, I am sure, be a mistake for the Minister to see Mr. Jenkin other than on the basis that he is prepared to go into the case in some detail. It would be better to refuse discussion and face the consequences than see Mr. Jenkin in an attempt to fob him off.
3. What could the Minister say? He might start by saying that the case against the Sergeant rested substantially on the evidence of self-confessed KMT agents. Certain discrepancies in the recorded testimony of these agents had caused us some concern but there was no way now of reopening the enquiry since these witnesses had long ago been deported to Formosa. On the other side of the picture, Sergeant Chu had made little attempt to defend himself at the enquiry; none of his Chinese colleagues in Special Branch spoke up in his defence (as they might be expected to do if they had felt he was the victim of a frame-up); and he had made no attempt whatsoever until 1965 to contest his dismissal in 1962. After a committee of enquiry appointed under the British Nationality Act had advised in 1963 that Sergeant Chu should not be deprived, on grounds of disloyalty, of his status as a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (this advice was not incompatible with the earlier decision to dismiss the Sergeant from the Police) the Governor at that time, of his own volition, caused the disciplinary proceedings to be reviewed but did not see any reason to intervene. In short, there were some features in this case that were not altogether satisfactory, but they did not constitute sufficient reason for the Minister to intervene particularly when viewed against the entire history of the case.
4.
I see no security objections to the Minister saying any of this in confidence to Mr. Jenkin. But he ought to avoid being drawn into details of this case (summarised at 4/Eiii) and, if he decides to see Mr. Jenkin, it will be necessary to consider very carefully what use he makes of the background material in paragraph 1 of my minute at (10).
5.
I should be grateful for your views.
20 August, 1968
br.5. Carter
(W. S. Carter)