Ref: HKK 14/9
Mr. Gaminara
Mr. Rushford and I have considered the Savingram at (22) and your minute of 5 November.
2. As regards paragraph 3 of the savingram I do not, think it would be sufficient only to amend Section 123 and to rely in respect of Section 122 on the fact that the press cannot be required to leave the Court under that section, The reason why it is required that the verdict and sentence in a criminal case should be given in ⠀ open'
+
Court
is so that not only the public but particularly the relations and friends of the accused may know what has happened to him. I do not consider that it would be satisfactory to rely upon the accuseds relations and friends obtaining information as to the Court's decision from newspapers because
(1) the press might not report the result
of the case;
(ii) it might be reported only in a paper
which the relations and friends do not see;
(iii) fishtaberete was printed in a language
not known to the relations and friends; and
(iv) even if the result was reported in the
newspaper normally read by the relations and friends of the accused it could well be, as date on which the result was given in Court might not be known to the relations and friends, they would miss the item in the newspapers,
In these circumstances I suggest you should go back to the Hong Kong Government and ask them to amend the Section 122 in the same way as they propose to amend Section 123..
3. As to paragraph 6 the savingram, this is really a matter of policy and not of law.
4. As to paragraph 8 of the savingram, I agree with paragraph 5 of your minute I do not think you should agree to the suggestion of postponing indefinitely the amendment of this Ordnance.
Sir Arthes Grattan-Bellew,
Have
auf fratten Beller auf
(Sir A. Grattan-Bellew)
10 November 1969
you any comments, please,
saving despatch?
attacked draft saving
Mr. Gaminasa
addition to
ANG
169
25.11.
on the
I have made a small but I that impitant
aste/69 af fratton. Beller
to para. 3.