CONFIDENTIAL AND PERSONAL
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London SW1A 2AH
LAST PAPER
HKG 380/8
23 November 1981
Sir Murray MacLehose GBE KCMG KCVO Governor and Commander-in-Chief HONG KONG
Dear Mumay,
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
1.
HKS 380/3 380/3
RECIVED AS MY NO R
23 NOV 1981
DZAK OFFICER
*GRI
PA
IBBR
en
Thank you for your letter of 24 September. We have put the matter to the Secretary of State, explaining the whole position, including the differing practice in Hong Kong and the other dependencies.
He has decided to let matters rest as they are.
2. In case the issue is raised when the Lord Privy Seal visits Hong Kong we shall brief him defensively, taking the line in paragraph 5 of your letter.
3. I hope this is helpful. I know that you will let us know if there are any developments at your end.
مسلام
Dick
RD Clift
Hong Kong and General Department
1
CONFIDENTIAL AND PERSONAL
Also at HKG 35018
(4
•
Doos O
Doos 0
Doos 0
Secretary of State
MR. Dongid
13
Andiku
Lyne
Mr Ly
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE DEPENDENT TERRITORIES.
1
-NIR
1. Your minute of 13 November. As you say, the Secretary of State has dealt with this question before. The reason why Mr Ridley instructed the department to submit again was that public attention had been drawn to the different practice over commutation of death sentences in Hong Kong and the other Dependent Territories. This emerged through the publication in Hong Kong of a letter from Mr Ridley to Mr Marks MP in which the former set out the general policy towards the majority of the territories, ie that HMG would not intervene to prevent an execution going ahead.
2. Since 1973, sentences in Hong Kong have been automatically commuted by the Governor in Council, the main justification being the feeling in the House of Commons against capital punishment (last shown by a free vote in July 1979).
3.
Mr Ridley was concerned that HMG might be open to criticism for adopting a different attitude in Hong Kong. The submission makes clear, however, that the position there can be maintained. Indeed, the Governor has advanced strong political arguments against any attempt to alter the practice after so long. It can be justified on the grounds that the legislature in Hong Kong is not elected whereas legislatures in the other Dependent Territories are.
4. I do not think that the Secretary of State need read the submission but I think he should be aware that the subject has come up again and that both the LPS and Mr Luce consider that the present practice should continue. It would be helpful to Sir Murray MacLehose to know that Lord Carrington was in the picture. You may think that it would be sufficient for the Secretary of State to see only this minute, but a summary of the submission is attached if required.
13 November 1981
Artmald
A E Donald
Letter sent h Sir Mr. Macfehore
Fr. 23/1,
prepare briffon
Pa
LPS then
Original at HKG 380/8
CONFIDENTIAL
нка 3801в
23 NOV 1981
FICER
PA
BAR
TRY
Daos
Daos
CONFIDENTIAL
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE DEPENDENT TERRITORIES :
SUMMARY OF SUBMISSION
Problem and Recommendation
1.
HMG's attitude to the application of the death penalty in
the Dependent Territories differs as between Hong Kong, where
automatic commutation is the practice, and the other dependencies
where the law is generally allowed to take its course with no
question of interference by HMG, It is recommended that this
situation should continue.
Background
2. In all dependencies except Hong Kong the Creech Jones doctrine
applies. If the Governor, after consulting his local advisers,
considers that an execution should go ahead and a petition is made
to The Queen or the Secretary of State, no attempt is made to
interfere with the Governor's decision unless a miscarriage of
justice appears possible.
3.
i
In Hong Kong, since 1973, the Governor in Council has auto-
matically commuted death sentences. This is backed by a 1975
statement that rejection of a plea for clemency would not be
possible while feeling in the House of Commons was against capital
punishment.
4. The difference in treatment of Hong Kong and the other
territories has recently received some attention in the Hong Kong
press but there has been no pressure for change.
Argument
5.
Removal of the death penalty for murder in Hong Kong from
the Statute Book would not be politically feasible. Nor would
abolition of the death penalty in the other territories.
/6.
CONFIDENTIAL
Dass
23/13