then be
It was alary long established conduct practer that of an office's conduct constituted a crimend of should be dealt with I Coruto and not
Reference. HKK 14/38
The points raised in Sir Arthur Grattan-Bellew's minute of 20 August were discussed with Mr. Roberts, Mr. Rushford and Sir Arthur Grattan-Bellew on
September and the following conclusions were reached (references are to the paragraphs of the minute in question):
Paragraph 2
in draciplinary proceedings Thus, if clause 3 becomes offran
apprestig The Macutely
law
am
Jadrantage State.
on the ground that it wasnot relvant
change
of accepting an advantage
to a
It would be
Mr. Roberts explained that the inclusion of the Words "any Government Department or undertaking" in the definition of "public body" in clause 2 was for the purpose of clarification. However, he agreed to look at the definition again.
Paragraph 3
It was suggested that clause 3 of the Bill should be broken down into two clauses, one dealing with the relatively minor offence of accepting a present in circumstances where corruption may not necessarily be involved, and the other dealing with cases involving corruption. The maximum penalties could then be varied in relation to each of the two clauses.
So far as the minor offence was concerned, it was suggested that for presentational reasons there might be advantage in including in the clause some- thing on the lines of Colonial Regulation 51. As clause 3 stood at the moment it might mean that where a criminal prosecution for a minor offence failed, then action under Colonial Regulation 51 t establish practic could follow this might be regarded as dis
contrary to long
Vom Carter Spud he would like to lingur the Maak goud of
lad of thistory established prachu,
eripiration against the public servies. Moreover, under the clays in its present form,the defence to
golight accept conviction on a minor
toyt
in which ease the court might rule evidence of a more serious charge involving Corruption If the clause were broken down into two separate clauses, as suggested, a person accused of the more serious charge could still be convicted of the lesser offence.
It was agreed that the words "whether for himself or any other public servant" should be omitted from clause 3 since the definition in clause 2(c) was wider.
matter Mr. Roberts undertook to examine the einuse further and to let us know if he wished to ask us to reconsider our attitude to the clause.
that puan pay to the from Paragraph la
paypay
an amanto
equivalent to the
cidvantage
the
person
Wuch had
hum connected of creepting
of suspects
It was explained to Mr. Roberts that there were serious difficulties about accepting clause 10 as it stood and Mr. Roberts is to give the matter further thought. It was suggested that provision should be included in the Bill for the 30Vory of press
err
conviction, by a coying ortor. empowering Blount that to adora person conuictady of acceptin cadrantige to orday
Capnom"
Paragraph 5
an
it was suggested that clause 14 might be amended to provide that an accused person could be called upon to make a statement and that the prosecution could ask the court to draw an inference from any refusal by the
In any event, some provision would be needed to exclude wivesh from the application of İcertain parts of this clause.
accused to do so.
It was agreed that a suspect of accord person should not be forced to incriminate himself and
/ Paragraph
...