FCO 4
NOTE ON F. C. O. POINTS
F. C. O. 4
20
?
? legislation by
Paragraph 2 (of Grattan-Bellew's minute F.C.O. 1).
The definition of "public body" in clause 2 of the Bill has
been amended to meet this point.
2.
Paragraph 3. The suggestion of the F.C.0. that clause 3 of
the Bill should be divided into two so as to provide for a heavy
penalty in bribery cases where a corrupt motive could be shown and a
lesser one where it was not possible to prove this was carefully
examined.
However, it was felt that this would, from a prosecution
point of view, give rise to difficulties both in drafting the indictment
and also in deciding what evidence should be called. It was also
thought that it could be left to the Court, when passing sentence, to
distinguish between those cases where the offence was only technically
Corrupt
"committed" and those where a genuinely element had been established.
Certainly there is force in the comment that the acceptance
of a very small gift by an officer constitutes an offence under clause 3.
However, a defence of "lawful authority or reasonable excuse" is
provided and it is proposed that the Establishment Officer should, in
consultation with the Attorney General, issue a guidance circular for
the information of the service, giving instances of the kind of
estab. concular, penalty for accepting advantage which an officer might properly accept. The Attorney General gift and of propilen ter the offence
would then regard compliance with such a circular as constituting
a reasonable excuse.
The words "whether for himself or for any other public
servant" have been omitted from clause 3 as suggested.
3.
Paragraph 4. As was expected, there has been some local
opposition to the inclusion of this clause, which has now been amended
with the intention of making it less open to abuse and less of a source