CONFIDENTIAL
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE DEPENDENT TERRITORIES
Some observations on the draft report sent to the Cabinet Office under Mr Milton's letter HKG 380/1 of 31 August
juridical,
1. The paper does not explain the reasons constitutional and political why the Creech-Jones doctrine was adopted, or how far they remain valid today. There are many Members of Parliament who will certainly draw attention to them. Paragraph 2 deals only with one aspect.
2.
The paper does not explain that in the advanced territories elected Ministers are constitutionally responsible for law and order. Paragraph 8 deals with this matter in a way which seems to me jejune and somewhat unrealistic.
3.
The phrase "old testament" in paragraph 9 is regrettably tendentious. Capital punishment is a matter of serious public debate in many countries - notably just now in New York - ; and Mr Creech-Jones was a Secretary of State of unequalled enlightenment.
4.
Paragraph 12(i) emphasises the difficulty of amending the Bermuda constitution. Some of the other constitutions are also the result of conferences and it is hardly acceptable, even where it is legally possible (and this is doubtful in Belize and Montserrat), unilaterally to depart from the basis of understanding on which the constitution was agreed at a conference, without prior notice to the other party.
5. The paper refers to reactions in Westminster and in the territories to various eventualities. What may not be made sufficiently clear is. the calculated effect of the various possible courses upon constitutional and political relationships between HMG, Governor, Ministers and public in the dependency and the implications for law and order. (Experience in the British Virgin Islands four years ago should not be overlooked.)
-
6. Annex A conceals the fact that in the independent countries of the Caribbean execution by hanging is a very common occurence. In Jamaica and Trinidad these may run to 20 or more annually. A country like Eelize is to most intents and purposes independent and it is necessary to consider whether it makes sense to change the policy for the remaining period of its dependence, (knowing that it will immediately revert to the common Caribbean policy on independence) rather than to proceed ad hoc as has been done hitherto.
CONFIDENTIAL
17.