CONFIDENTIAL
-4-
H
Argument
10. It could be argued that HMG's position on capital punishment
should be consistent throughout all Dependent Territories where
capital punishment still prevails. Indeed, HMG has used this type
of argument in another context the Nationality Bill to oppose
the Gibraltar amendment. It is admittedly possible to defend its
exceptional attitude to Hong Kong on the grounds that, unlike the
other Dependent Territories concerned, Hong Kong has no locally
elected legislature. However, to employ this argument publicly would
offend local Hong Kong sensitivities. Also, as stated by the
Governor in a letter of 21 March 1980, the overwhelming wish of
the population in Hong Kong was for the so-called Creech-Jones
doctrine,under which HMG does not reverse the local decision, to
be reapplied.
11. It does not however follow that the Creech-Jones doctrine should
now be applied to Hong Kong.
-
Non-commutation of a death sentence
-
would provoke political outcry in the Territory, where there is a
significant though minority and largely expatriate body of opinion
against capital punishment. This would be echoed by parliamentarians
and others in the UK. Even stronger is the argument that it is now
some 15 years since a death sentence was carried out in Hong Kong
and a reversion to the use of the penalty after such a lapse of
time would be bound to attract strong condemnation and serious
political embarrassment. It could arise, for example, that the
condemned man might be a British expatriate in Hong Kong. The
problem is aggravated by the fact that the rate of death sentences
would be higher than in other dependencies; eg in 1980, 4 death
sentences were commuted.
CONFIDENTIAL
/12.
Page 90Page 91