Foreign and Commonwealth Office
HKK 384/2
R N Peirce Esq
CONFIDENTIAL
Deputy Political Adviser
HONG KONG
Dear Bob,
London SW1A 2AH
2 September 1986
HKCK 324/2
HONG KONG RESIDENT WANTED BY THE CHINESE POLICE
1.
2.
+
Thank you for your letter of 30 July.
We of course appreciate the problems that requests from the Chinese such as that regarding Luo
Luo Jinglun present for you. The wording of Interpol/Hong Kong's message of 7 February "was indeed unfortunate, and we would clearly have found ourselves in considerable. difficulties if we had had to deploy with the Chinese the line summarised in paragraph 8 of your letter. Fortunately Luo's departure got us all off the hook.
3. We were interested to see your ideas (paras 10-12) on how the wider problem might in due course be tackled. We share your view that satisfactory formal procedures will be very difficult to negotiate with the Chinese. However, we wonder whether it might be useful to give further thought to the idea of informal arrangements, which you say would be "anathema to Hong Kong opinion and our courts". Is it primarily an issue of principle - or might Hong Kong concerns be met if adequate safeguards were built into any procedures to be agreed (eg safeguards as regards the court procedures to be followed in Hong Kong before extradition and the level or type of punishment to be imposed in China after return)?
4.
As regards the possibility of some form of extraterritorial jurisdiction being assumed by Hong Kong, we have sought the preliminary views of our Legal Adviser Paul Fifoot, who has commented as follows:
"1.
assuming
There are precedents for extra-territorial criminal jurisdiction in respect of such international agreements as hijacking or agreements about internationally protected persons. The jurisdiction is assumed in consequence of an obligation either to extradite or to try, but the offences are very limited and, presumably, common to all the parties to
international
the
relevant
CONFIDENT TAT
28