CONFIDENTIAL
020377
MDHIAN 9320
CONFIDENTIAL
FM HONG KONG
TO DESKBY 021200Z FCO
HICB
400 11
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY
0 8 MAR 1990
DESI
INDEX
TELNO 793
OF 021015Z MARCH 90
AND TO DESKBY 02130OZ CARACAS
INFO PRIORITY PEKING
63
TOP COPY Q DIST ?
CARACAS TELNO 53: ACTING CONSUL-GENERAL OF VENEZUELA
1. CARACAS MAY FIND THE FOLLOWING HELPFUL IN THEIR DEALINGS WITH THE VENEZUELANS OVER THE MANNER OF RAMIREZ'S ARREST:
(A) THE ARREST OF RAMIREZ WAS MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF A HONG KONG STATUTE AND THE WARRANT ITSELF WAS ISSUED BY A COMPETENT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY, NAMELY, THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE OF HONG KONG.
(B) IN HONG KONG, ALL WARRANTS OF ARREST ARE ISSUED BY MAGISTRATES AFTER THEY ARE SATISFIED BY EVIDENCE ON OATH THAT THERE ARE PROPER GROUNDS TO JUSTIFY THEIR ISSUE.
(C) IN RESPECT OF RAMIREZ, ON THE 26TH FEBRUARY A SENIOR MEMBER OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CHAMBERS APPEARED BEFORE THE CHIEF
MAGISTRATE TO APPLY FOR THE ISSUE OF THE WARRANT OF ARREST IN TERMS OF SECTION 18 (1) OF THE PREVENTION OF BRIBERY ORDINANCE. ONLY AFTER THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE HAD BEEN SATISFIED AS TO THE LAWFULNESS OF THE WARRANT DID SHE THEN ORDER ITS ISSUE UNDER SEAL OF THE COURT.
(D) ON THE AFTERNOON OF HIS ARREST, RAMIREZ WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE AND WAS GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SATISFY THE COURT THAT THE WARRANT SHOULD BE SET ASIDE ON THE BASIS THAT HE WAS NOT/NOT INTENDING TO LEAVE HONG KONG. HE GAVE EVIDENCE ON OATH. THERE WAS EXAMINATION AND CROSS-EXAMINATION. RAMIREZ WAS REPRESENTED BY LEGAL COUNSEL AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CALL WITNESSES. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING, THE COURT FOUND THAT THE WARRANT OF ARREST SHOULD NOT/NOT BE SET ASIDE AND THAT RAMIREZ SHOULD BE ADMITTED TO BAIL.
-
2. PARA 4 OF TUR. WE WOULD WELCOME THE VISIT OF A VENEZUELAN JUDICIAL OFFICIAL AND A FOREIGN MINISTRY OFFICIAL. WE COULD THEN BRIEF THEM PERSONALLY ON THE EVIDENCE IN OUR POSSESSION. WE BELIEVE THIS WOULD BE VERY MUCH BETTER THAN FORWARDING ALL THE MATERIAL TO THE VENEZUELANS, AS THEY HAVE REQUESTED. HOWEVER, WE WOULD WISH
1
PAGE CONFIDENTIAL
65