We appreciate the reasons why cases involving
penetration of Special Branch by KT agents need to
be rigorously dealt with but, given the serious doubts in this case (expressed both in Hong Kong and here)
that the charges were proved, e feel strongly that
some remedial action should be taken, if at all possible.
are advise of
we peafire that the decision of the Commissioner of Folice
to dismiss Sergeant Chu ander poters conferred on him by
the Police Force Urüinance cannot be reversed except by
means of special legislation and we accept that for
political reasons this would be a very difficult (if not positively dangerous) step to take at the present time.
Accordingly more can be no question of reinstatement
(he is in my case over 55) or of substituting
retirement in the public interest. Our legal advisers
have expressed the view that the proper course would b to grant sergeant u an ex-gratia pension of the amount he would have received by way of pension if he had retired
at the date of his dismissal in 1962; und that payment
would probably have to be backdated to 1962.
This, of course, would not clear the Sergeant's name
and he might press for full clearance, using the
Parliamentary channels that he has established.
But
we feel that in this event we could hold the position by
stating that the grant of an ex-gratia pension was an act
of clemency in the light of further consideration of the
case but that this further consideration did not establish
the innocence of Sergeant Chu.
would look of this case again &
le should be grateful if you could fiveetply
consideration to a solution on the lines set out above.
Page 90Page 91