CONFIDENTIAL
C
Background and Argument
3. We put to the Hong Kong Government the suggestion that
they might refer all cases to us before taking action.
Their response was that they would be happy to consult us on
particular cases which were likely to cause political
controversy but believed that doing so automatically in all cases would simply add another layer to the process, making it clumbersome. They suggested that we could follow a
similar procedure to that adopted for asylum and film
Censorship cases, where they consult us on particularly
sensitive cases. In this way, the Secretary for Security or
the Political Adviser could decide whether any particular
cases merited being submitted to HMG.
4. The current system that has evolved for dealing with
asylum cases and film sensorship cases works well. Hong
Kong deals with many of these on a routine basis but refers
the most sensitive ones to us, to give us the opportunity to comment or comment, or to disagree with their recommendation. I think
1 this is a sensible approach and recommend that we adopt it in cases of co-operation with China on criminal matters.
5.
In parallel, we asked the Home Office whether they would
be prepared to become involved in overseeing Hong Kong cases
of this nature. They have replied that, after careful consideration, their view is that there is no reason why the
Home Office should be involved in such cases. They point
out that there would be no action to be taken in the name of
Home Office Ministers and thus no basis on which they could
find themselves exposed to criticism.
at some
time
IN
the future
6. We cannot of course rule out that the press may pick up
that someone in China has been executed using evidence
provided by Hong Kong. But it needs to be born in mind that Hong Kong has a real problem with criminals from China, and that
TICABS/2
CONFIDENTIAL