CONFIDENTIAL
immediate abolition, delay could be dangerous.
To abolish the
death penalty in obvious juxtaposition to, and anticipation of
a case as serious as a double murder would substantially increase
the risks of damage to our interests in Hong Kong. It might
therefore be unwise to delay unless we are genuinely uncertain
of our final decision on the death penalty, or unless Hong Kong's
Executive Council are so anxious to postpone a confrontation that
we would provoke a worse crisis by seeming intransigent.
8.
If delay is ruled out there would remain only the third
option, to change the law now. An Order in Council abolishing
the death penalty would create a once-for-all crisis of
confidence which might not endure but which, while it lasted,
would be damaging. If, as seems likely, we decided to take no
steps to alter the law in the other Dependent Territories that
still have the death penalty but elected legislatures, this would
underline the unique impotence of Hong Kong. Given the sensi-
tivity, the economic strength and the political situation of
Hong Kong, both Governments have hitherto been careful to blur
the fact of this impotence and to minimise its effects.
Relationships with the United Kingdom would be bound to suffer
across the board. The third option of immediate steps by HMG
to change the law of Hong Kong should therefore remain one of
last resort.
CONCLUSION
9. The Governor has argued strongly that we should leave the
law in Hong Kong as it is; or failing that, that we should take
4
CONFIDENTIAL
/no
Page 60Page 61