CONFIDENTIAL
機 密
XCC(74)40
2
advised that as more severe sentences in respect of drug offences committed for profit have been awarded since the middle of 1973 and in the light of the Attorney General's powers, mandatory sentences should not be sought at this stage, the position to be reviewed again in twelve months.
5
The Attorney General has sought the views of the Chief Justice on mandatory sentences. The Chief Justice and the Judiciary as a whole are alive to the role which the courts have to play in suppressing the illicit drug trade, but as anticipated, he is vigorously opposed to restricting the discretion of the courts in this matter by legislating for mandatory sentences.
6
In the light of ACAN's advice and the views of the Chief Justice, it is proposed that mandatory sentences for major drug offences should not be included in the proposed legislation.
Fines
B
7
ACAN agreed that the balance of advantage lies in speci- fying the maximum fines which may be imposed for drug offences and advised that these should be raised substantially to achieve in practice the same effect as if the upper limit on fines was removed altogether as originally proposed.
Dangerous Drugs (Amendment) Bill 1974
8
At Annex B is a bill to amend the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Chapter 134), providing for heavier maximum fines for the major offences which are generally committed for profit. It also includes one other amendment detailed in paragraph 10 and not con- nected with penalties. All have been agreed to by ACAN.
9
In section 4, the maximum penalty for trafficking in a dangerous drug is raised on indictment from life imprisonment and $100,000 to life imprisonment and $1 million, and on summary conviction from 3 years and $50,000 to 3 years and $500,000.
10
Section 6 is amended by creating the offence of offering to do, or doing any act preparatory to or for the purpose of manu- facturing a dangerous drug. This will close a loophole in the law.
C.S. 166
CONFIDENTIAL
機密