CONFIDENTIAL
Hennig than
Zaxcept
m
accordance with
an international
ogreennt
"1.
There are precedents for
criminal jurisdiction such international
extra-territorial respect of hijacking
assuming
in
agreements as internationally
either to
are
common to
relevant
or agreements about protected persons. in consequence of an obligation extradite or to try, but the
but the offences Limited and, presumably, parties
the
The jurisdiction is assumed
to
very all the international In addition there is nothing to extra-territorial
Convention. prevent a state asserting jurisdiction
over its own nationals. United Kingdom does So in relation to bigamy and various other offences. the problem here is that of evidence. There would be objection to
asserting
jurisdiction
nationals
2 =
nalsfe
extra-territorial
The murder, However, getting the
a state
criminal
its
over persons who were not
see
as
"backed" by in another
So far as China is concerned, I don't the extra-territorial jurisdiction providing a way into the post-1997 arrangements
route but perhaps a possible route would some system of backing warrants, that is to say be to adopt a warrant for arrest and removal is issued in one jurisdiction (China) and is signature
a judicial authority jurisdiction (Hong Kong). At this might well be possible to make depend upon the satisfaction of authority of certain preliminary issues though the more that Looks like extradition the attractive it
Less 1997."
Chinese after
of
will be to the
stage it the backing the judicial
5. We hope these preliminary comments may be useful David Jeaffreson's group in their researches. There would certainly appear to be Core difficulties Long the route as well, and you may find that Paul's alternative suggestion offers thought. We would
scope for further
"extra-territorial"
grateful
if you Would as Hong Kong's thinking on this
in any event be keep us in the picture thorny issue develops.
cc: D G Blunt Esq
PEKING
A M Layden
Hong Kong Department
- Har