231
Written Anstvers
HOUSE OF COMMONS
House in my statement of the 5th March. These proceedings led to three further petitions to the Privy Council all of which have been dismissed; and the Judicial Committee have themselves expressed
their
Written AnSTURYS
should be quite sufficient to prevent any repetition of the happenings in the Gold Coast case. I may add that this procedure corresponds to that which has been in force regarding appeals from India for years, and has been found
some grave concern and disapproval regarding the course followed.
satisfactory.
or
I have been in consultation with the Lord Chancellor and the Law Officers on the question of the steps that can be taken to avoid, for the future, such delays as To occurred in the Gold Coast case. secure the lodging of a petition without delay, rules have been made within the last two three years by Colonial Governors fixing a time within which the various steps must be taken, both in the Colony and here, leading up to the lodging of the petition. These rules are not made under Statute, but they are simply executive rules depending on the power of the Governor to postpone the carrying (When the Gold out of the sentence. Coast case began these executive rules had not yet been made there and this caused the delay in the first instance.) The pro- cedure is that the accused have three weeks in which to furnish proof to the Governor that they have sent the neces sary
instructions to solicitors in this country. I then fix a date, usually one monta after arrival of the papers in this rouatry, within which the accusel's advisers inust lodge the petition with the
When Judicial Committee.
once the petition is lodged the Judicial Committee hears it without delay,
These rules will be strictly adhered to and if a petition is not lodged in time the sentence will proceed-unless of course the case is one in which the Governor thinks that the prerogative of mercy should be exercised.
I
If a Governor comes to the conclusion that any proceedings taken by accused persons either in the Colony or by way of petition here are without real substance he will not allow these proceedings to cause the postponement of sentence. have considered whether any further steps, whether by amendment of the law or otherwise, should be taken to avoid delays, but as procedure by way of petition to the Privy Council depends on the right of the subject to petition the King and the prerogative right to admit these petitions, any legislation on the subject would be inadvisable. Moreover, the rules and practice I have indicated
·
I turn now to the prerogative of mercy. As I explained in my statement of 5th March, His Majesty by Letters Patent or Order in Council expressly delegates his prerogative of mercy in criminal cases to Colonial Governors, and this includes both the power to pardon an offender either absolutely or conditionally and the lesser power to respite (i.c. postpone) sentence. Further, the Royal Instructions give a Governot the most precise instructions as to the exercise of the power of pardon in capital cases; he must call for a written report from the Trial Judge; he must con- sider the case in Executive Council, to which he may summon the Judge, and may require him to produce his notes of the trial; but it is the Governor himself who is to decide whether a pardon or re- prieve is or is not to be granted. These provisions are common form in Colonial constitutions. It is absolutely clear, there- fore, that the effect of these instruments is to give power of pardon to the Governor. In the Gold Coast case the Governor in fact commuted the sentences on two of the prisoners at an early stage, and at the last he commuted the sentences on two others for reasons which he explained in a statement made to the Legislative Coun- cil on 28th March, a copy of which I have placed in the Library of the House.
I come now to the position of the Secretary of State. I am advised, as 1. previously informed the House, that the delegation by His Majesty to Colonial Governors of the power of pardon does not entirely empty the King of his own prerogative of mercy. That is, I under- stand, the legal position. If a petition is presented to His Majesty praying for mercy, it is my duty to advise him what, if any, action should be taken upon it. The normal practice of the Secretary of State for the Colonies is not himself to intervene in an individual case and not to advise His Majesty to intervene. would be most unfortunate results if the Secretary of State followed any other course. First, it would be necessary for him to consider fully the facts of each case and all the considerations which bore upon it. That is a matter of great difficulty in
There