*TRANSFERRED FROM HKL 370/11 ©*
CONFIDENTIAL
27 June 1991
HKC370/13
G Lester Esq
SEC (O) (C)
Ministry of Defence
Main Building Whitehall
London
Foreign & Commonwealth
Office
London SWIA 2AH
Telephone: 071-
FILE
ее ник
M
folio 1612
Dear Cruy
HONG KONG: CROWN PROCEEDINGS ORDINANCE/CLAIMS AGAINST BRITISH FORCES
5.
1. Please refer to my letter of 11 June which we discussed briefly on the telephone.
2. I have now received our Legal Advisers' views on Hong Kong's draft legislation (Miss Brooks minute to me of 26 June attached). I should be grateful if you could feed these into your own Legal Advisers and let me have your and their views. Miss Brooks specifically asks for MOD views in paragraphs la), 4 and 8 of her minute.
3.
A separate related issue has arisen: I should be grateful if you could advise me on the present situation concerning criminal jurisdiction over the British Forces in Hong Kong. If a British soldier committed a crime in Hong Kong would he be dealt with in Hong Kong courts or by HM Forces?
Yous ever Pamda
PA Major (Ms)
Hong Kong Department
CC: Miss Brooks, Legal Advisers
MUKAOI
CONFIDENTIAL
CC
CONFIDENTIAL
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
Main Building Whitehall London SW1A 2HB
Telephone
(Direct Dialling) 071-21-837/6 (8) 2084 (Switchboard) (Fax)
071-21-89000
071-21-8
(8)1242
RFR
Your reference
MB 20/8
Mr RAJ Bunten
HKD
Room WH305
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London SW1A 2AP
см
Our reference
D/Sec (0) (C)/6/7
Date
19 August 1992
From: Ms K A Robertson, Secretariat (Overseas) (Commitments)
Dear Rod-
HONG KONG: CROWN PROCEEDING ORDINANCE/CLAIMS AGAINST BRITISH FORCES
I should like to start by apologising profusely for the inordinate delay in replying to you on this question. We sought advice
advice from our legal people on receipt of your (predecessors') various letters last year, and answer came there none
at least as far as we were aware. It turns out that PL(LS) Legal wrote to us on 23 July 1991, but we did not receive their minute.
2.
While it
it would seem only fair to bring the Crown Proceedings ordinance in to line with the Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces)
Forces) Act 1987, our view is that there is no benefit in amending the legislation at what is effectively the eleventh hour: it is in any case unlikely that the Chinese will be bound by any change we make to the Ordinance, and the Basic Law has already been drafted.
3. Although the Hong Kong Crown Proceedings Ordinance still debars claims against the Crown, we understand that claims against the MOD by LEPS are being met on an ex-gratia basis. Given this fact, changing the legislation at this late stage will have no practical effect; natural justice is being met by this pragmatic approach and
and we therefore believe that we should not proceed with the proposed change.
Yours ever
Kiny
100% Recycled Paper
CONFIDENTIAL
2