RESTRICTED
116312
MDHIAN 8528
CONCERN TO EXTEND THE AGREEMENT TO COVER CURRENCY TRANSFERS THAT ARE ILLEGAL IN INDIA (BUT NOT IN BRITAIN) WAS RESOLVED BY AGREEMENT TO ELABORATE REFERENCES TO CRIME WITH THE PHRASE QUOTE INCLUDING CRIMES INVOLVING CURRENCY TRANSFERS UNQUOTE. FURTHER DIFFICULTIES ON THE INSTITUTION OF PROCEEDINGS IN BOTH COUNTRIES, TERRITORIAL APPLICATION, AND POSIBILITY OF REFUSING REQUESTS DUE TO EXCESSIVE COSTS WERE CONCLUDED SATISFACTORILY. WE EXPLAINED THAT INDIA WOULD NEED TO PURSUE AN AGREEMENT WITH HONGK KONG, DIRECTLY WITH THE HONG KONG AUTHORITIES.
THEY ACCEPTED THIS BUT DID NOT INDICATE WHETHER THEY WOULD DO SO.
8.
THE MAJOR POINT OF DIFFICULTY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED CONCERNS RESTRAINT/FORFEITURE OF FUNDS ON THE GROUNDS THAT THEY BELONG TO A PROSCRIBED (TERRORIST) ORGANIZATION. THE UK DRAFT HAD PROPOSED INCLUDING THIS FOR ORGANIZATIONS PROSCRIBED IN THE UK (IE PIRA AND INLA), BUT WE HAD TO RESIST THE INDIAN WISH TO PROVIDE RECIPROCALLY FOR ACTION IN BRITAIN AGAINST THE LARGER LIST OF ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ARE PROSCRIBED IN INDIA. THE UK SIDE EXPLAINED THAT THE PTA PROVIDED NO POWERS TO PROSCRIBE NON-IRISH ORGANIZATIONS AND AND PROPOSED DELETING THE ENTIRE PROVISION IN THE DRAFT. WE ALSO OFFERED WORDING TO GIVE PARTIAL RECOGNITION TO INDIAN CONCERNS WHICH WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE PTA. HOWEVER, THE INDIAN SIDE CONCLUDED THAT THEY WOULD NEED TO REVERT TO THIS ARTICLE IN A FURTHER ROUND OF DISCUSSIONS IN LONDON.
9.
TOWARDS THE END OF DISCUSSION, THE INDIAN
LEGAL ADVISER ATTEMPTED TO EXTEND THE SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT BEYOND FORFEITURE AND RESTRAINT, TO INCLUDE ARREST, DETENTION AND INVESTIGATION. AFTER DISCUSSION THE INDIAN SIDE AGREED NOT TO PURSUE THIS.
COMMENT
10.
THE DISCUSSIONS WERE FRANK AND CARRIED OUT IN A CORDIAL AND CONSTRUCTIVE ATMOSPHERE. A GOOD DEAL OF DETAILED EXPLANATION WAS NEEDED BEFORE DISCUSSION OF THE TEXT COULD BEGIN, BUT THIS PROVED USEFUL IN CONVIN- ING THE INDIANS SIDE OF OUR DETERMINATION TO HELP THEM WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT.
PAGE RESTRICTED
3