This was particularly time in Hong Kers, where there was an official Majonty in the Laz sature
as well as
the rewer if discoll wares.
Operation
The
dependent territories. The UK approved the laws of the
was not wholly bojical dependencies and it seemed odd for us to put ourselves in the position of appearing to frustrate their question power of return would be a deterrent. Under the old law, embarrassment might have been avoided in Godber's case, since he would probably never have come here.
12.
parallel, once the laws
were
there
very clearly
assim dcted to cul own.
The following points then arose in discussion:- (a) in the Home Office view the revocation of a rule
which was now universal in extradition arrangements would lay the Government open to criticism. The parotter of the hand case of the Charmel Islandss
the way ist an vsuet Despite the political embarrassment of the Godber case, the Home Office thought it doubtful whether that case alone would be seen as a sufficient argument for abandoning a safeguard that was thought desirable in 1966. Home Office representatives also drew attention to the other difficulties which had been set out in Mr Brennan's recent letter to Mr Stuart. The FCO thought on the other hand, that the Godber case showed that a mistake had been made in 1966 which should now be rectified.
(b) The question arose whether a provision such as the FCO wanted (whether relating to Hong Kong alone or to all dependencies) could be made by Order in Council under section 2(3) of the 1967 Act. It was pointed out that, in February 1967, during the Committee stage of the then Fugitive Offenders Bill, the ten Government indicated inter alia that they hoped
in most cases there would be no exceptions, adaptations or modifications required and that in every case the arrangements governing return would be basically those set out in the Bill. The remarks made at that time suggested that the power had been sought in order to deal with minor procedural modifications and that it had not been intended for making fundamental changes to the Act in its application to any particular dependency. The double criminality rule was one of the basic principles of extradition and to remove it would diminish the degree of recir- rocity to an extent which went beyond an "adaptation" or "modification". Only one order had yet been made
2