01-405 7641 Ext. 3229
ommunications on this subject should be addressed to
THE LEGAL SECRETARY
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CHAMBERS
CONFIDENTIAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CHAMBERS,
LAW OFFICERS' DEPARTMENT,
ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE,
LONDON, W.C.2.
21
Our Ref: 14/2/255
Dear Stuart,
29 November, 1973
Overläker
P/A 311z
HONG KONG'S RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED KINGDOM
Thank you for your letter which was received here on 28 November. My comments on the draft paper are confined to the section dealing with Corruption and the Fugitive Offenders Act. It is not clear to me whether your draft paper was prepared before the meeting in the Home Office on 27 November. My comments are as
follows
(a) Annex paragraph 14
I suggest there should be inserted after the sentence "but there is no parallel offence in this country" the following
"The Attorney General was consulted when the Hong Kong Ordinance was introduced and advised that some of its provisions, and in particular Section 10, was contrary to the basic principles of English criminal law and that he would not be able to justify those provisions on legal grounds.
11
(b) Paragraph 16
I suggest that the following should be substituted
"The arguments for making no change in the Fugitive Offenders Act are two-fold. First, if there is no double criminality rule the Home Secretary would be open to criticism if he authorised the return of a man accused of something which we do not in this country regard as a crime. Second, the practical case for justifying amending legislation in Parliament rests almost entirely on the episode of Godber and Section 10 of the Hong Kong Bribery Ordinance, which is open to criticism. Against this,
CONFIDENTIAL