CONFIDENTIAL
1 MKD 384/3
!
152762
MDLIAN 3038
TOP COPY Q DIST ?
CONFIDENTIAL
FM HONG KONG
TO PRIORITY FCO
TELNO 1188
OF 140915Z APRIL 89
INFO PRIORITY PEKING, UKREP JLG HONG KONG
22
YOUR TELNO 711 : EXTRADITION
1. THANK YOU FOR THE THOUGHTS IN TUR. WE HAVE THE FOLLOWING
COMMENTS:
2. PARA 2. GENERAL STRATEGY: WE AGREE THAT PROVOCATION IS TO BE AVOIDED, WHILST SAFEGUARDING OUR REASONABLE FEARS. WE TAKE YOUR POINT CONCERNING HIGH EXPECTATIONS OF CHINESE PROMPTNESS, BUT IT IS THIS VERY LIKELIHOOD OF BUREAUCRATIC DELAY WHICH DICTATES THE NEED TO MINIMISE THE ROLE OF CHINESE DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS ABROAD, PARTICULARLY IN CASES OF URGENCY.
•
3 PARA 3(A). INSTURCTIONS AND THE LEGISLATIVE PROVISION: OUR DRAFT IS IN MIFT. SINCE THIS IS A PROVISION WHICH IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED WITH THE LEGAL AND PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE AGREEMENT REACHED SO FAR, AND SINCE IT GOES TO THE HEART OF CPG'S ROLE, WE AGREE THAT WE SHOULD PUT THIS SCHEME TO THE CHINESE. A CONSEQUENTIAL PARAGRAPH FOR THE DRAFT PAPER IS INCLUDED IN THE AMENDED PAPER WHICH IS TO BE SENT BY FAX.
4. PARA 3(B). NEW IDEAS FOR LEGISLATION AND FOR CHANGES TO MODEL AGREEMENT: WE HAVE THE FOLLOWING FURTHER THOUGHTS ON THE VARIOUS ADDITIONAL ISSUES TO WHICH WE HAVE RECENTLY REFERRED:
(A) RECOURSE TO THE COURTS.
(I) WE BELIEVE THAT WE WILL WISH THE LEGISLATION TO RECOGNISE EXPRESSLY THE RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW AS IN SECTION 9(7) OF THE 1988 ACT. THIS WILL HAVE TO BE COMBINED WITH A PROVISION ALONG THE LINES OF THAT REFERRED TO IN MIFT TO CATER FOR DECISIONS TAKEN UNDER INSTRUCTIONS. BUT THIS WILL HARDLY THEN TAKE THE CHINESE BY SURPRISE SINCE WE HAVE ADDRESSED THEM ON THIS RIGHT AD NAUSEAM. CONVERSELY, IS A DETAILED POINT NOT DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO PREPARATION FOR NEGOTIATION OF BILATERAL AGREEMENTS. THE CHINESE ARE LIKELY TO BECOME UNNECESSARILY SUSPICIOUS IF WE PUT THIS PARTICULAR LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FORWARD AT THIS STAGE. WE WOULD PREFER NOT TO DO SO.
IT
1
PAGE
CONFIDENTIAL