- 3.
Policy Options
8. There are three main alternatives:
(a) to reaffirm the Creech-Jones Doctrine, accepting that this may
occasionally lead to executions (with the consequent risk of criticism in Parliament and from the public in this country); if Ministers decide to adopt this policy, there is no need for it to be announced publicly, but we shall need to send guidance
to Governors;
(b) to invite Governors to consider whether, in the light of the
recent vote in the British Parliament, they should now intro-
duce legislation to abolish capital punishment in their own territories; similar action was taken in 1965 (after capital punishment had been suspended in Britain) and 1970 (after its abolition for murder), and on each occasion the legislatures of the dependent territories listed in paragraph 6 above declined to pass the necessary laws; would do so again on this occasion;
it is likely that they
(c) to take steps to abolish capital punishment in the territories concerned through the processes of UK law (although this would represent a most unusual direct intervention in the internal affairs of the territories, when consulted last year most Governors believed that such a move would be understood and
accepted, with no more than token protests).
9. If the second of these courses is adopted and, as we anticipate, most if not all territories reaffirm their wish to retain capital punishment, this will of course 'make it easier subsequently to maintain the Creech-Jones Doctrine. On the other hand, it will make it more difficult subsequently to impose abolition from Britain.
10. If it is decided to impose abolition through the processes of UK law, this will require an Act of Parliament to make it effective in all cases. Only in Hong Kong, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands could abolition be effected
*
/through
CONFIDENTIAL
1
1