I doubt the relevence of this argument. The conceper of "falined" was
Imknown when the law was douffed,
MW),
necessarily be the same as that of the United Kingdom.
The
Colony does not have the same relationship with such persons
as does the United Kingdom and the conditions and circumstances
in Hong Kong are quite different.
4. In any case it is most likely that the great majority of
cases in which citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies are
removed or deported from Hong Kong will either be the result
of a court recommendation (following a conviction for a
criminal offence) or will involve security or political
considerations; and it has been agreed all along that the
need for a judicial enquiry could be dispensed with in cases
which the Governor certified as involving security or political
considerations.
5. Reference to the deportation legislation of other dependent
territories shows that there is no general uniformity in the
treatment of citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies.
In
no other territory is any distinction made, so far as deportation
or removal are concerned, between United Kingdom patrials and
other citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies.
But
circumstances in Hong Kong are, in any event, so different from
those obtaining elsewhere that the practice in other dependent
territories is not necessarily relevant to the situation in
Hong Kong.
6. For the above reasons and since the position of UK patrials
is safeguarded I recommend that the Ordinance be accepted as
enacted and that notification of its non-disallowance be conveyed
to the Governor in the normal way.
2.
/7.