2.
SECRET
4.
I said that I saw no objection to (b), but warned them that I did see strong objection to (a) in that:-
5.
i)
ii)
iii)
I felt sure that even if the Secretary of State decided to act as proposed, he would wish to say that it was on the advice of the Governor in Council, and this would be misunderstood locally:
it would be tantamount to abolishing the penalty for ever in Hong Kong, whereas I believed it was the wish of members and the public to retain it in case a shift of Parliamentary opinion in the UK permitted its use again:
it would re-arouse in a very acute form local feelings of frustration and grievance with resulting damage to Hong Kong/UK relations. On the other hand I did not believe that after the long passage of time since the sentence was carried out anyone in Hong Kong now expected the law to take its course, and that although this was a source of continuing complaint which was often vociferous and pointed,
nevertheless I felt that provided the issue was left where it was the steam would gradually go out of it provided that the other measures we were taking to fight crime were successful. therefore asked them to reflect further.
I
We had a further discussion today in which they agreed not to press me to pursue (a) above. In further discussion of (b) I put it to them that
it would be unreasonable to withhold advice on all
death sentences, but I would respect the motives of anyone who preferred to abstain from giving advice in a case in which he felt the law should take its course.
6.
This seems to me a tolerably satisfactory outcome, provided, as I think it probably will, members abstention remains secret.
SECRET
/7.