[
ת
108
public safety.
2.
This measure was drawn up on the
lines of the China (Amendment) Order-in-
Council, 1920, except that it provided for the
deportation order to be issued by the Governor-
in-Council, instead of by an Order of Court
after a judicial enquiry.
In a confidential despatch the Governor wrote
that the provision in question was intended
primarily for use in a special class of case
-
that of undesirable Indians, and that it was necessary
to have power to deport Indians of known bad
character and disloyal sentiments in order to
prevent the spread of disaffection among the
Indian troops and Police in Hong Kong.
3.
The Government of India has protested
against the possession of such a power by the Governor-in-
Council and has pressed for the alternative
machinery provided for in the Order in Council.
4. In this connection it may be pointed
out that there exists a clear distinction between
the Order-in-Council 1920 and the provisions of
the Hong Kong Ordinance, which does not seem to
L
be appreciated by the Government of
India. The Order in Council provides
for the punishment of offences defined in
it, whereas the Ordinance is concerned
with the prevention of anticipated
disturbances by executive action.
In the former case a judicial enquiry
is clearly called for: in the latter,
assuming the necessity for the provision
the decision would seem to rest more
appropriately
with
the Executive
Council, based, as it would be, on a
report by a responsible officer after
the person against whom action is
contemplated had been given full
opportunity of explanation and protest.
5.
The Officer Administering the
Government of Hong Kong has however,
expressed the view that in the peculiar
circumstances of the Colony the ordinary
procedure of a judicial enquiry and an
be
Order
i