Mr Clare
WIAD
Rey Pls Cle away.
28
Reference..
CONFIDENTIAL
FROM: M Stone
HONG KONG DEPARTMENT
10/11
DATE: 10 November 1989
DEPENDENT TERRITORIES: CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
26
HKB 380 |
un 14/4
1.
You will have seen our telno 2269 to Hong Kong and their reply
HK telno 3738.
2. I share your and UND's concern not to draw out the differences
between Hong Kong and the Caribbean DTs and I believe paragraph 1 on page 2 is sufficiently broad to accommodate Hong Kong.
3. Hong Kong have suggested that the third tiret on page 3 does not
reflect the position in Hong Kong and have referred to their
telno 863 which we accepted. I am not clear whether the Creech- Jones doctrine does not apply to Hong Kong, but if it does, then
presumably HK telno 863 is factually incorrect. That aside, I
wonder where the third tiret is not infact adequate. It is silent
on the prisoners' right to appeal to the Queen. Presumably if the
Queen did decide to exercise clemency, the Governor would take that into account in arriving at his decision.
4. I therefore suggest that he draft is adequate and that the
first sentence on page 2 be amended to read "Broadly the situation
is the same in all DTs. Once the judicial.......
11
CODE 18-77
ROZAQW
CONFIDENTIAL
Miel sue
Page 15Page 16