}
7
These powers of removal and exclusion and, possibly, the power to require security might also be found suitable in cases coming within Class B. In some cases the giving of security might also suffice in Class A cases.
We suggest that the adoption of one or other of these expedients as an alternative to an order for deportation should be very carefully considered. Recognizing, how- ever, that deportation may in some cases be justifiable and even inevitable, we suggest that it should only be enforced against persons who have been resident in the territory concerned for less than two years. Incidentally, we see no reason why the power to adopt the alternatives should not extend, if desired, to any British subject, or, in a Protectorate, to any British protected person, who comes within Class B or Class C, however long he has been in, and even if he "belongs to", the territory. Although this question may, strictly, be outside our terms of reference, we consider it necessary to mention it as it appears convenient to include provision to this effect in the model Ordinance we are required to draft.
10. We think that a limiting period of twelve months might reasonably be applied to persons falling under Class D. People who are likely to become a charge on public funds on account of disease, mental infirmity, or destitution may reasonably be liable to be deported if they are comparatively recent arrivals, but after a period of twelve months we should regard them for this purpose as "belonging to "the Colony or Protectorate concerned and constituting a respon- sibility which the Colony or Protectorate would not be justified in disclaiming. We are of opinion that in suitable cases the person concerned should be per- mitted, as an alternative to deportation, to give security for idemnifying public funds from expenses incurred in his regard.
We think that the limiting periods suggested in paragraphs 7 to 10 above should, in general, be applied in all cases. We realize, however, that there may be exceptional cases in which the deportation of a person would be desirable in spite of the fact that he may have resided in the Colony or Pro- tectorate concerned for longer than the limiting period applicable to his case. We recommend, therefore, that power should be taken to deport persons falling within the categories set forth in paragraph 5, even after the expiration of such period but that such power should only be exercised when the prior approval of the Secretary of State has been obtained. Deportation of persons falling under (a), (b), or (c) of paragraph 3 should not, however, be permissible under any circumstances.
12. We do not think that a Colonial or Protectorate Government should rest content with merely making an order for deportation. In many cases no doubt the person who is the subject of such an order will be ready to make his own arrangements for leaving the Colony or Protectorate concerned, but, in other cases, the Colonial or Protectorate Government cannot acquit itself of all responsibility by requiring a person to leave its territory. We consider that an order for the deportation of a British subject should not be made unless the Government has satisfied itself that the person who is the subject of the order will be accepted by that part of the British Empire to which he belongs. Acceptance of an "undesirable " by that part of the Empire to which he is held to belong cannot be taken for granted, and if it is withheld we can see no justification for the deportation of an undesirable to the United Kingdom when the natural place to receive him would be some other part of the Empire. We also consider that the Government should make arrangements for the transport of the subject of its order of deportation to his destination without any charge being imposed in this connection upon any intervening territory, and should pay any passage or other expenses incurred in this connection if the deportee is not in a position to do so.
If the deportee has property, we consider that the Government should be empowered to apply it in or towards payment of any such expenses.
13. Our terms of reference make no express mention of Protected States, but we have thought it convenient to give some consideration to them.
66
In the Malay States, the Ruler of the State, acting with the advice and consent of the Resident, has very extensive powers of banishment which apply to any person and these powers are very extensively exercised. A British subject is not immune from the operation of the Federated Malay States Banish- ment Enactment. (This has been held by the courts.) We understand that in