russested that Wdzene merde i "consulne" status for their ECMA prison
misfitm
Chinese proposals en vissa for misopicus. Gray mo not a visa question.
1.2. Changć proposed cuttling vica evostion witheos referanse to Gray,
and that shert-tani vices to Civen to TEGA London.
35. 1.50
General Secretary of Hational Union of Journaliste asked for interview
with Foreign Soorstany about
27. 1.53
20. 1,53
H.M. Chanzó stated that we should fail to ac'love patMmment with Chinoce
if we altoylul to cut amet it beyond official silo, i.c. to inalale Brey
11.1. Cazać recomiendoj ceceptance of Chinen deannds sado en 28 Jamary
far farral Nav Year visite to moA and other journalist weinenews, 17
relaza fer official vicit to Cruy. Visita by otir organisations to
prisoners should not do and on rosmests, though Thinoso could eller vol
anda Commlities to be observed to moot British difsimulticu.
+
Fort
21. 1.63
Hong Kong Covenement agreed to uno of "release to China" fékmula for
dentrtation of #UA MINO, though he would be agrested if be reluzca.
munch bad boen made to Tela prisoners jot,
NO
Hong Kong Government inleated loscl difficultico in acceding to Chinoso
zoquesto, but was willing to
/azocco
1
' ד'
L
1
تاب
ترب
arrange special visits to HSVEN P'ING and 10 YU-JO by two NOHA
officielo, though not to other
patriotic Journalists", of when there were at loagt 12.
Tondon
10. 1.60
F.0. recommend Hong Kong Governant proposals of 29 January to H.M.
Chargé.
6. 2.68
0. 2.60
Cradock's interview at Chinese K.F.A. Conmiler Department. He expressed
British difficulties ovez Hola erbstig vissa because of Grey question,
and repeated offer (now on official level) of emolinaga for IBUCH PLING,
Chiasse reiterated that Grey was not visa question.
་*
II.1. Chargé exxy resood disappointment at hio instruc- tions, and
expressed the view that nntil ve made aubstantial concessions vis-à-vis
liong Kong prisoners, there would be no consuler access to decy nor
prospect of his rolesso.
Jordan
13. 2.68
Roport that Grey's sizi friend had received cable from hin in lost few
days, saying he had recolvod lotters and telograms from hor.
14. 2.59
Manager of Communist Bank allowed individual visits to oix inwisoned
employeca, accompanied by two others from the Bank.
Maw Kons
12. 5.50
Tiong Kong Governacht set out its position on prison visita, proposing
that individual visits by œmlaycos of the detained jouranlicts could be
nonaidescă. Subject to certain conditions (0.5. tinire) ii Chinese would
supply nanou of other patriotic Journalisto* in question. The Rong Kong
Government was anxious not to conccle quasi-conmules atatea in NCHA, or
the formal right of regrasentatives of communist organisations to visit
petconero,
Gʻ HSIDINMALAY
1
7
J
·
NA
feed.
(51
ORCAIN IN copy on Fife zg
copyalro
expy
20
Fe13/08 (145
Cypher/Cat A
CONFIDENTIAL
IMMEDIATE PEKING TO FOREIGN OFFICE
Telno 133
20 February, 1968
CONFIDENTIAL
تقامت
RECEIVED IN ARCHIVES NË 31
¡FEB 1968
FD13/8
See Latein FD Addressed to Foreign Office telegram No.133 of
20 February, Repeated for information to Hong Kong.
Hong Kong telegram No.212: Prison Visits.
ра
I am however
1
چه
I am grateful for this clarification. surprised to learn that under the
existing rules it has all along been possible for an extra visit to a
prisoner to be granted to an outside person (given compelling reasons
and prisoner's agreement) without the prisoner having first to ask for
such a visit and that an employer is usually granted one such visit. The
position as stated in Hong Kong telegram No.1908 was that special visits
could only be granted on the On instructions I so prior request of
prisoners themselves. informed the Chinese on 31 December. This has been
a major sticking point in the negotiation.
70
2. I think it a great pity that we should not have been informed of
these possibilities in December when prison visits were first discussed,
or even a few weeks ago when the question arose of access at Chinese New
Year. Much valuable time would have been saved and we could almost
certainly have secured access to Grey.
3. Proposals now put by the Governor in his paragraph 5 fall short of
the first Chinese demand of 28 January (access to NCNA and "patriotic"
journalists) in only one important respect i.e., it is suggested that
employers and not NCNA would visit the "patriotic" journalists. I
strongly recommend that we should include the NCNA in such visits i.e.,
propose a visit by the employer plus an NCNA official, for the following
reasons:
(a) As for holding out on this one point we would endanger the whole
deal;
~PD1 3/4 (+1)
(b) As pointed out in Hong Kong telegram No.206, in some cases the
employers of the "patriotic" journalists are themselves in gaol and may
not be easily available;
(c) By allowing the NCNA to participate in these visits we would not be
making any admission of the NCNA's quasi Consular status. We could in
any subsequent discussion justify our actions and if need be distinguish
this from Consular access by pointing out that the NCNA was allowed
visits to the journalists because it is a Press organization and that
such visits did not mean that they had any right to visit other
categories of prisoner.
CONFIDENTIAL
/(a) I note
1
CONFIDENTIAL
Peking telegram No.133 to Foreign Office.
-2-
(a) I note that the Governor considers the possibility of including an
NCNA official among the visitors (paragraph 7 (8) of telegram under
reference);
(e) In the end our object is quick access to Grey. I consider such
access important enough to justify slight straining of the miles in the
above sense.
6.[sic] If above is agreed I could make an immediate approach to the
Chinese, though I would mot propose to go into detailed points at the
end of paragraph 5 which I think would be better dealt with in Hong Kong
at time arrangements are made. This approach would not cut across
expected Chinese reply on visas and on Grey-Hsueh-ping exchange, though
we might bear something, particularly on the second point, at the same
time. Again I think it most important we should move quickly if we want
to avoid the danger of joint communications expiring.
Sir D.Hopson
DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION
F.0.
F.E.D.
Consular Dept.
P.C.D.
D.D. & P.U.S.D.
J.I.R.D.
NEWS DEPT.
D.S.A.0. PERSONNEL DEPT.
C.O.
H.K.D.
NEWS DEPT. O.L.A.
88888
ADVANCE COPIES SENT
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
RECEIVED IN 'ARCHIVES No.31
op.a.
Mr. Wilkinson
31 JAN 1968
FD1378
}
་
Flag A
Problem
VISITS TO N.C.N.A. PRISONERS IN HONG KONG
Sir Donald Hopaon was summoned to the Chinese Ministry
F2-1/3 (207) of Foreign Affairs on 28 January to receive two "demands":
Flag B
(a) That arrangements should be made for N.C.N.A.
correspondents and other "patriotic journalists"
to be visited by N.C.N.A. officials over the
Chinese New Year. In return, the Chinese would
consider arrangements for a visit by a British
official to Mr. Grey.
(b) Arrangements should also be made for representatives
of other organisations to visit the two categories
of prisoners, on application.
Sir D. Hopson has strongly recommended that we meet the Chinese
demands. The Governor of Hong Kong has reservations and is
prepared to agree only to a visit by unaccompanied N.C.N.A.
officials to the N.C.N.A. prisoners.
Recommendation
2. I recommend that we accept the course proposed by the
Governor. I attach a draft telegram in which the Commonwealth
Office concur.
Background and Argument
I
I
3.
The Chinese had earlier made an approach asking for
/special
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
2
53
special visite to N.C.N.A. prisoners and other journalists
by N.C.N.A. officials and members of Chinese organisations.
They then asked that food and clothing should be brought in.
Flag C (3)The Governor of Hong Kong pointed out (Hong Kong telegram
No. 1910) that it was essential from his point of view to
avoid discriminating between political and other prisoners
and lending support to Chinese charges of bad conditions by
agreeing to extra food and clothing. He was however willing
to allow special visits, in addition to the monthly visits
already permitted to relatives, if the N.C.N.A. prisoners
complied with the regulations by specifically requesting them.
This was accepted in London and by Sir D. Hopson.
It was
conveyed to the Chinese but the matter has not been pursued
until now. The present request, while demanding less than
the last (i.e. omitting demands to take in food and clothing)
is in essence the same, as the Governor has pointed out, and
is thus open to the same objections (see my submission of
Flag D(b) 29 December, 1967). Meantime, it was announced in Canton
yesterday that the Kwantung branch of the Chinese Red Cross
had decided to send 1,000 suits of winter clothing to
compatriots in prison in Hong Kong.
4. The important difference on this occasion is that the
Chinese have indicated a willingness to allow consular access
to Mr. Grey. Understandably, Sir D. Hopson is reluctant to
let this opportunity pass since it is, as he says, another
indication, together with the recent Chinese approach about
entry and exit visas, that they are disposed to try to settle
/some
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
- 3-
some outstanding problems. On the other hand, there
remains considerable force in the Governor's argumenta
against discrimination in favour of the political prisoners
and in the need to prevent propaganda capital being made
out of prison visits by large numbers of communist sympathisers.
In the end our real hope of securing Mr. Grey's release, as
opposed merely to consular access, lies in an exchange. This
can be pursued after the deportation of the two communist
film stars, which the Governor is putting in train, in order
to test the Chinese reactions. In the meantime, I do not
think that we should go beyond the course which the Governor
proposes. As it is, the N.C.N.A. prisoners are treated far
more generously than Mr. Grey and to make further concessions
to them which would damage our position in Hong Kong would
not be justified. Moreover it would underline to the Chinese
the value of Mr. Grey as a means of putting pressure on us
in Hong Kong.
び
Janne Munay.
(James Murray)
30 January, 1968
FR 31
Copies to:
Mr. Samuel
Mr. Carter, C.0.
Sir D Aller.
Jagree
Xa7
Whilhuison 30/
CONFIDENTIAL
Joan
16 What
CONFIDENTIAL
67
OP COPY
Cypher/Cat. A
FLASH
HONG KONG TO COMMONWEALTH OFFICE
lno 132 29 January, 1968
CONFIDENTIAL
ARCH
Seperate Submax-FD13/8
ре
هناء نعم
Addressed to Commonwealth Office telegram No. 132 of 29 January,
Repeated for information to Peking.
F2 3/3 202 Peking telegram No. 84: 23/3200
Visits to Prisoners.
I am most anxious to help, but I am not sure that latest Chinese request
marks any great advance on terms of request 013/reported in my telegram
No. 1908.
Chinese
The major difficulty remains that of appearing to discriminate in favour
of Communist prisoners, as we should do if we conceded the principle of
special arrangements for visits to "other patriotic journalists" (of
whom there are 12 at least) and to the people mentioned in paragraph
1(b) of Peking telegram under reference. in this respect the position
remains as in paragraph 1 of my telegram No. 1910.
2.
3.
There are some other problems from our point of view:
F0131853
(a) The need to avoid giving large numbers of people the
excuse to appear at the prisons and stage demonstrations. (The
Communists are currently organising hostile deputations to government
buildings.)
(b) The need as far as possible to prevent the Communists
making propaganda capital out of these visits.
(c) The fact that prison rules preclude visits during holiday periods.
The local public Chinese New Year Holiday ends on 1 February but of
course festivities continue after that date.
On the other hand, I would certainly be prepared to let the Chinese know
that special arrangements could be made for the two NCMA prisoners (who
seem to me to be in a special position as employees of an official CPG
organisation with quasi-consular status). I suggest that the reply to
the point in paragraph 1(a) of the telegram under reference should be on
the following lines; "If two unaccompanied NCNA officials care to call,
and identify themselves at Stanley Prison to visit the two NCMA
prisoners, Sit Ping and Lo Yu-ho, on Friday next, 2 February, before
4p.m. we would expect that an immediate visit could be arranged. Te
would ask that the names of the visitors be communicated in advance to
the Assistant Political Adviser by the NCNA and that there should be no
publicity for the visit."
CONFIDENTIAL
4. I must
CONFIDENTIAL
Hong Kong Telno 132 to Commonwealth Office
-2-
I must however make it clear that if the two prisoners should object to
the visit (which I would not expect) then I could not allow it to take
place against their wishes. The best I could do then would be to
endeavour to obtain their objections in writing.
5. If after the reply has been given the Chinese raise the question of
visits to any other prisoners, I am afraid I could not agree to anything
more being said than that monthly visits to such people by their
relatives and friends (who could include, if the prisoners wish,
representatives of their organisations) can be permitted under the
existing rules; which are set out in paragraph 2 of my telegram No.
1908..
F.O. pass Flash Peking as my telegram No. 42.
51
Sir D. Trench
F.0.
DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION
F.E.D.
Consular Dept.
P.C.D.
D.D. & P.U.S.D.
News Dept.
0.0.
H.K.D.
News Dept.
D.3.A.0.
Personnel Dept.
XXXXX
DIS MOD
[Repeated as requested]
ADVANCE COPIES SENT
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL-
J. Murray, Esq., C.M.G. Far Eastern Department.
With the compliments of
THE OFFICE OF
THE BRITISH CHARGÉ D'AFFAIRES
(P. Cradock)
PEKING
15 January, 1968
PEK
+
CONFILENTIL
office of the British
Charge d'Affaires,
PEKING.
15 January, 1968
67
FD13/8
After much correspondence over prison visits in Hong Kong, thought
occurs to us which perhaps should have been brought into the discussion
earlier.
2. The rules governing prison visits in Hong Kong lay down that special
visits can take place only at the request of the prisoners themselves
and we have sc told the Chinese, But what is the procedure where a
representative of a foreign government, say the Danish Consul, wishes to
have access to one of his nationals in prison? Presumably such a visit
is allowed on application by the representative concerned without
special request from the prisoner. Is this not the correct analogy for
"official" NGNA visits to Hsueh P'ing? Although, of course, MCNA Hong
Kong have no consular status, they are something more than private
persons. Moreover, is this not the parallel for our own applications for
consular access to Grey?
3. Perhaps you would let me know what Hong Kong practice is on this
point. If access is allowed in the situation I describe above without
special request from the prisoner, there is more reason (despite the
official position we have taren hitherto) for permitting NCNA Hong Kong
to make an "official", though carefully controlled, visit to Hauch P'ing
and possibly Lo Yu-ho without prior request by those two.
I am copying this letter to James Murray in Far Eastern Department.
(P. Cradock)
But an Asweds auch La
T.A.K. Elliott, Esq.,
Colonial Secretariat, HNG KONG.
Hat
Thank
pe le چیدم
ре
I think
leave it to
the Ellot I fly.
Mul 15 Jan
V
Chuvas as Hong Kong "nationale"?
Свилен
M/s Vadition
Miss Jan.
Neither have Chien
.
panports. Hsuch as legut have a Hk. Identity Card but I am but for
whether to doe
wit CONFILENTIAL
alco
ساءل
Lewin 281;
bi
| FD 13/8.
66
ᅡ
CONFIDENTIAL
CYPHER/CAT A
FOLIGN OFFICE AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE TO PEKING AND OTHER MISSION
TELEGRAM NO. 52
12 JANUARY, 1968 (F)
CONFIDENTIAL.
ADDRESSED TO PEKING TELEGRAM NUMBER 52 OF 12 JANUARY AND TO
HONG KONG
/FD1378
65
YOUR TELEGRAM NUMBER 34: N.C.N.A.
42
DECISION ON PROPOSALS IN MY TELEGRAM NUMBER 1052 HAVE BEEN HELD UP FOR
MINISTERS TO CONSIDER WHOLE QUESTION OF GREY AND POSSIBLE ACTION AGAINST
N.C.N.A. ABOUT WHICH WE SHALL BE TELEGRAPHING YOU SEPARATELY. YOU WILL
WISH TO KNOW HOWEVER, THAT AFTER CONS! DERING ARGUMENTS IN YOUR TELEGRAM
NUMBER 307, OUR INCLINATION WAS
TO FOLLOW SUGGESTION IN YOUR PARAGRAPH 3 WITH THE ADDITIONAL PROVISO
THAT WE MIGHT WISH TO RENEW RESIDENCE PERMIT FOR PERIODS OF ONLY ONE
MONTH AT A TIME.
SOSFA/CROSEC
DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION
F.O. F.E.D.
PASSPORT CONTROL DEPT
CONSULAR DEPT
NEWS DEPT
0,0. HONG KONG DEPT
43
Bee reply
fromm
Now Teling. (tet no 48).
Pa
CONFIDENTIAL
す
TELEGRAM SECTION
Room 124 K.C.S.
Communications Department
F.E. D. FDIS/8.
*Please send copies of the following telegram
*Copy/ies of the following telegram has/have been sent
(*delete as applicable)
52
TO:
Mr.
To Peking eto 14%,
Burley
Home
Offee Princeton House
YTC/1
66
271 High Holborn
(Signed)
(Department).......
(Date).....
Action taken in Communications Department:
(Initials)....
६
(Date).........
both
AFTER ACTION THIS FORM SHOULD BE SENT TO
THE APPROPRIATE ARCHIVES DIVISION FOR RETENTION
156397 500 Pada 2/66-McC & Co Ltd-K.16430 (3609)
Registry No.
DEPARTMENT
FD1348
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
PRIORITY MARKINGS
(Date)
Confidential
Flash Impudiate
Pylority Routine
Unclassified
}
• Date and time (G.M.T.) telegram should
reach addressee(a)
66)
Despatched
H
R
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
24
1815/14/1
PRIVACY MARKING
In Coufidence
Le Chair. Code Cypher
[Secu
Security classification" -if any
[ Privacy any
Privacy marking
tion]
CONFIDENTIAL
1.
PEKING
Addressed to
52
telegram No.
"IL"
........(date)
bankkabının
12/1
A
And to..
·
Draft Telegram to :-
No..
Poking
(Date)
And to:-
52
12/1
[Codeword-if any].
repeated for information to
... HONGKONG
Repeat to:-
Hongkong
Saving to:-
87
Distribution:- Departmental
FED
PCD
Consular Dept. News Department. Hebe Kong Dept.
Hr. Burley, Home Office
Princetown House
FORV
Saving to
-----k.com bomuldsgebieden en bekenden und
Your telegram No.
34
:
---------+|·
N.C.N.Acision on
proposals in telegram No. 1052 have been held
up