1400
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
HKK 341/1
RECEIVED IN REGMINY NO. 54 2.4 NOV 1978
146
FM HONG KONG 231105Z NOV 78
TO IMMEDIATE F C O
TELEGRAM NUMBER 1352 OF 23 NOVEMBER
INFO IMMEDIATE PEKING
DECK OF
INDEX
No
INFO VIENTIANE, UKMIS GENEVA, WASHINGTON, HONG KONG
GOVERNMENT OFFICE LONDON
INFO SAVING HANOI
184
en
on
RY
CLE
MY TELNO 1326 AND FCO TELNO 725 (NOT TO ALL): ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ORIGINALLY FROM VIETNAM..
ON 22 NOVEMBER THE ASSISTANT POLITICAL ADVISER TOLD NCNA ABOUT
A FURTHER GROUP OF 120 WHO ARRIVED ON 5 JUNKS ON 17 AND 18 NOVEMBER.
THESE MAD LEFT PEIHAI AT THE SAME TIME AS THE GROUP OF 133 AND INTERVIEWS WITH THE GROUP PROVIDED CORROBORATING EVIDENCE ABOUT THE EARLIER GROUP, ONE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE, POINTED OUT TO NCNA, WAS THAT SOME MEMBERS OF THIS GROUP HAD CROSSED THE LAND BORDER FROM VIETNAM TO CHINA AND HAD SUBSEQUENTLY BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO JOIN RELATIVES IN PETHAT. APA PASSED OVER PHOTOCOPIES OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE (MEAL TICKETS, RATION COUPONS, ENVELOPES ADDRESSED TO MEMBERS OF THE GROUP FROM ELSEWHERE IN CHINA). HE SAID WE PROPOSED TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR BOTH GROUPS TO
BE REPATRIATED ON 25 NOVEMBER.
2. NCNA TOOK NOTE BUT SAID THAT THEY ALREADY HAD A REPLY TO OUR REPRESENTATIONS ON THE GROUP OF 133. THE ESSENTIAL POINTS WERE :-
A. THESE PEOPLE DID NOT COME WITHIN THE TERMS OF THE ORAL AGREEMENT IN 1974 ON THE REPATRIATION OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS: B. THEY HAD NOT BEEN ACCEPTED** BY THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES AND
HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN RESIDENTIAL PERMITS:
1
C. THEY WERE NOT CHINESE CITIZENS BUT WERE FUNDAMENTALLY""
VIETNAMESE.
3. NCNA MADE IT CLEAR THAT THIS REPLY HAD COME FROM CANTON AND THAT PEKING HAD NOT BEEN CONSULTED. THEY SAID THERE WAS NOTHING FURTHER THAT THEY COULD DO AND SUGGESTED THAT MY FURTHER REPRESENTATIONS SHOULD BE MADE THROUGH THE BRITISH EMBASSY IN PEKING, MEANWHILE, THEY ADVISED THAT NEITHER GROUP SHOULD BE PRESENTED AT THE BORDER, THEY ADDED THAT THE EARLIER GROUP OF 69 WAS STILL BEING INVESTIGATED,
/ 4. DURING
CONFIDENTIAL