(17865) Dd.145178 400m 5/73 G.W.B.Ltd. Gp.863
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
CONFIDENTIAL
3.
accert
I acknowledge the force of all these arguments;
and after consulting the Law Officers and the Whips,
who take the same view, I have reluctantly come to
the conclusion that, unless the Hong Kong Government
produce evidence against Godber of a returnable offence,
such as actual corruption, we can take no steps to send
him back to face trial.
4.
Nevertheless, I think we ought now to look again
at the general applicability of the double criminality
rule to the dependent territories; not with a view to
sending Godber back to Hong Kong, but because of the
light which his case has thrown on the working of the
1967 Act. I realise that our two Departments
considered the question in 1966 when the new legislation
was being prepared by the last Government. But having
now been confronted by the full implications of the
Godber case, I wonder whether, on this particular
point, we may have been wrong.
5. The double criminality rule was applied to
Commonwealth countries in 1967 as a departure from the
previous law, in a situation of increasing change
within the Commonwealth. We also decided at the same
time to apply the double criminality rule to the
dependent territories, although in other respects
they were not treated like independent countries.
6. This last decision was not, however, wholly
In the case of colonies like Hong Kong, where
HMG have control over their legislation, the rule can
logical.
CONFIDENTIAL
/confer