5. My recommendation would be that we look at this again in 2 months
when Sir M Meglehose would be available There could have been changes,
in either direction in the state of our relations with China by then We
should not in the meantime give any guidance to Mr P'ei about the
chances of a meeting taking place. If our general relations have
continued to improve my inclination would be in favour,
6.
Mr Laird concurs.
23 June 1971
Copy to: Mr Laird (Hong Kong Dept)
RESTRICTED
-
- 2 -
1
J AL Morgan
Far Eastern Department
Mr. Morgan, FED
RESTRICTED
418
I met the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires the other night at the Pakistan High
Commission. He raised with me again the question of confrontation
prisoners in Hong Kong mentioning that he hoped the matter would be
resolved by the time the present Governor's tour of duty came to an end.
I said to Mr. Pel that, as he knew, we had the question of confrontation
prisoners very much in mind.
It was, however, not an easy question to resolve though we knew what the
Chinese position was. It was most important for us to proceed within the
law or there could be serious problems in Hong Kong. As he knew,
releases which had taken place so far had been on the advice of the
Prison Board of Review and this we thought was the correct way to
proceed.
2.
Mr. Pei then asked me when Sir D. Trench would be leaving and what Sir
M. MacLehose's plans were for taking up his post. I said that Sir D.
Trench would be leaving about the middle of October and there would
probably be a gap of three weeks to a month between his departure and
the new Governor's arrival, I asked Mr. Pel if he had ever met Sir M.
MacLehose and he said he had not done so. I said that Sir M. MacLehose
would be in London from time to time over the next few months and
enquired if he would be interested in meeting him if this could be
arranged. He did not give me any particular
answer to this
3. I understand that at his meeting with Mr. Royle this morning he
mentioned our conversation and said that he would like to meet Sir M.
MacLehose if this was possible. Mr. Royle, I gather, has some doubts
whether this would be a good thing suggesting that the Chinese might be
able to represent in some way that Mr. Pei was giving the new Governor
the once over. I recognise that this is a possibility though I rather
doubt if the Chinese would take this attitude if indeed a meeting were
arranged. I had in mind that if a meeting took place and this would be
dependent in the first place upon Sir M. MacLehose saying that he was
agreeable it should be on
-
-
a social occasion, e.g. Nr. Pei is coming to lunch with me at home on 10
July. In the past there used to be contacts of an unofficial kind
between the Governors of Hong Kong and officials in China. For example,
I recall Sir A. Grantham paying a visit to the Chargé d'Affaires in
Peking in the course of which informal meetings were arranged. For
myself I would see no objection to Hr. Pei and the Governor-designate
meeting informally, but if Sir M. MacLehose or Mr. Royle were against
this I think that it willhot be difficult to get out of the meeting on
the grounds that Sir M. MacLehose will shortly be travelling abroad for
a month or more and that he will be very busy with final briefing when
he is next in London.
Mr.
22 June 1971
Coples to: Hr.
هنا
RESTRICTED
K M Wilford
1
+
Mr. Vorgan, FED
RESTRICTED
In Mugar
Мида
Dilyn maria this
ما
ул
to In Nachshon
Yesterday? En
23/6
I met the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires the other night at the Pakistan High
Commission. He raised with me again the uestion of confrontation
prisoners in Hong Kong mentioning that he hoped the matter would be
resolved by the time the present Governor's tour of duty came to an end.
I said to Mr. Pei that, as he knew, we had the question of confrontation
prisoners very much in mind.
It was, however, not an easy question to resolve though we knew what the
Chinese position was. It was most important for us to proosed within the
law or there could be serious problems in Hong Kong. As he knew,
releases which had taken place so far had been on the advice of the
Prison Board of Review and this we thought was the correct way to
proceed.
2.
Mr. Pai then asked me when Dir D. Trench would be leaving and what
Sir 1. NaoLehose's plans were for taking up his post.
1,
I said that Sir D. Trench would be leaving about the middle of October
and there would probably be a gap of three weeks to a month between his
departure and the new Governor's arrival, I asked är. Fei ir he had ever
met Bir M. MacLehose and he said he had not done so. said that Sir N.
MacLehose would be in London from time to time over the next few months
and enquired if he would be interested in meeting him if this could be
arranged, He did not give me any particular answer to this,
I
3. I understand that at his meeting with Mr. Royle this morning he
mentioned our conversation and said that he would like to meet Sir K.
MaoLehose if this was possible. Mr. Royle, I gather, has some doubts
whether this would be a good thing suggesting that the Chinese Light be
able to represent in some way that Kr. Fei waa giving the new Governor
the once over. I recognise that this is sponsibility though I rather
doubt if the Chinese would take this attitude if indeed a meeting were
arranged. I had in mind that if a meeting took place and this wold be
dependent in the first place upon Sir 3, MacLehose saying that he was
agreeable it should be on
-
a social occasion, e.g. Mr. Pei is coming to lunch with me at home on 10
July. In the past there used to be contacts of an unofficial kind
between the Gover ora of Hong Kong and officials in China. For example,
I recall Sir A. Grantham paying a visit to the Chargé d'Affaires in
Peking in the course of which informal meetinge were arranged, For
myself I would see no objection to Mr. Pai and the Governor-designate
meeting informally, but if Sir N. MaoLenses or Mr. Royle were against
this I think that it willnot be difficult to get out of the meeting on
the grounds that Sir M. MacLehose will shortly be travelling abroad for
a month or more and thất hạ will be very busy with final briefing when
he is next in London,
22 June 1971
Copies to:
Mr. Logan
Hong Kʊng Department
Kilford
PRIORITY
CYPHER CAT/A
TOP COPY
CONFIDENT LAB
RE
R
85
FM HONG KONG 03/01032
CONFIDENTIAL
14
TO PRIORITY F.C.O. TELNO 452 OF 3 JULY 1971. PRIORITY INFO CHARGE
D'AFFAIRES, PEKING.
FOR WILFORD FROM TRENCH.
YOUR TEL NO. 475.
CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.
84
BOARD OF REVIEW HAS RECOMMENDED EARLY RELEASE (PHASED OVER PERIOD JULY
OCTOBER) OF 13 REPEAT 13 PRISONERS. I HAVE NOT
SEEN THE RECOMMENDATIOMS YET BUT THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THEY WILL BE
ACCEPTABLE. PLEASE TAKE NO ACTION WITH CHINESE REPRESENTATIVES OR GIVE
ANY PUBLICITY UNTIL | TELEGRAPH FURTHER.
TRENCH
FILES
HKD
FED
SIR L MONSON
SIR S TOMLINSON*
MR WILFORD
PS TO MR ROYLE
NNNNN
CONFIDENTIAL
хово 1317
PRIORITY
CYPHER CAT/A
FM FCO 011723Z
CONFIDENTIAL
CONTIDENTIAL
1OF COPY
(FKP)
TO PRIORITY GOV. HONG KONG TELEGRAM NUMBER 475 OF 1 JULY FOR POLITICAL
ADVISER FROM WILFORD,
CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.
WE HAD EXPECTED A MEETING OF BOARD OF REVIEW IN JUNE. HAS IT TAKEN PLACE
AND, IF SO, WITH WHAT RESULT?
DOUGLAS-HOME
FILES
CRUD
FED
SIR I MOHSON
SIR 3 TOMLINSON KR WILFORD
IS TO NR ROYLE
FFFFF
:
+
CONFIDENTIAL
+
Ab1317
:
84
FEH 14/1
+
4
X
Registry No.
DEPARTMENT
H
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION PRIORITY MARKINGS
Top Secret
Confidential Kingd Undecided
Ex-Clair.
Cypher
Draft Telegram to:-
Mimmediate. Priority
(Date)
• Date and time (G.M.T.) telegram should
Despatched
reach, addressce(a)
212/28
GUD
CYTHER
Security classification CONFIDENTIAL 0117202
-if any
[Codeword-if any)
Addressed to
For. Hoy Kong selegram No.
:
No
(Date)
And 10:-
475
gor. Hong Kong
And to.....
น่า
repeated for information to
__(date)
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
Repeat to:-
Saving to.
TH
+
. A
FIL
1.7.10
Saving to:----
For Political Adviser from Wilford.
Comfrontation prisoners.
I've had expected
17 Reviews
meeting of
Brand
- June. Has it taken place
and if so, with what result?
123°
Distribution:-
FE
Sur & Mosa
min
نگ
Copier lo
Mi milford P.S.KM: Rayle
Mrs
7.
CONFIDENTIAL
R
N
R
Arford
Mr Logan
lir Graham
FEH 14
59
enter & for SM. 18.6
34188
A
B
DEPORTATION OF HONG KONG COMMUNIST PRISONERS TO CHINA
1. The Secretary of State has asked (Lisbon telegram No 253 of 4 June)
whether we could deport Hong Kong Communist prisoners to China.
2. This method was tried several times in 1968 but the Chinese refused
to accept them. On 14 March 1968 a test case was made of two Hong Kong
Communist film stars Shek Tai and Fu Ki. They were presented at Lowu,
the railway station on the Hong Kong/China border, for "release in
China". The Chinese refused them entry and subsequently protested to our
Chargé d'Affaires in Peking that this was a disguised form of
deportation and a new method of persecution.
A
3. On 11 April 1968 our Chargé in Peking raised the possibility of
deportation with Jo Kuei-po, the Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister. Lo
denounced the suggestion and said that the Chinese Government could not
possible agree to it. further approach was made in Hong Kong to the New
China News Agency branch there to test their reaction to the deportation
of an arrested Chinese agent, but NOHA refused to discuss the matter.
4. Then the then Foreign Secretary, Mr Brown, wrote to Ch'en Yi on 30
August 1967 about Sino-British relations, he referred to the possibility
of deportation for Hong Kong prisoners. The Chinese Government made no
reply to the letter.
5.
a.
b.
C.
Chinese objections to deportation are probably:-
Chinese inability to secure the release in Hong Kong of their supporters
would be publicly demonstrated.
The Chinese are concerned that the prisoners might refuse deportation;
the sulting publicity would be very damaging to the Chinese cause.
Acceptance of deportation might prejudice their claim that Hong Kong is
part of China.
- 1 ·
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
5. Hong Kong Department concur.
9 June 1971
Copied to:
Mr Deunt
Mr Laird
}
Arm
whid wehEHE
before
Sir L Monson ę write.
SALMorgan
J AL Morgan
Far Eastern Department
afraid that this is a
problim
tried to resolve by reportation
but we have himse ben able toma
M: Pei rances with me
again
11 June the
remaining prisoners relating their release ao Chon Enlai
did to 5...). Trench's departure.
be shall soon have
み
to look at this question again. If
a relatively small number
left with
whosh whatever world in
be completed say in 1972
mingtet
be able for permate to Chinese to take them off on hands for a
"holiday", But I am not optimthic.
Nava theless this re
Me
Kemsite.
option warthall have
Key Wilford/
The handling of free has sen
14
2
-
CONFIDENTIAL
ups 187
Ky=ilford
ра
FER
FEA
By.
$
DE CONTATION DE BORD KUSS ODIN ULIOF PRISONMS TO OPELNA
The Jeemiary of State has asked (Lisbon belegram No 253 (2 4 Jasa)
whether we could deport Hong Kong CommunÅ 0%
risoners tɔ China.
2.
This method was tried several times in 1960 but the Chinese refused to
accept them, On 14 Marek 1960 a test sade was made of two Rong Kang
Communist film staze Shož Ɛai undľu Xi. They were presented at Lewn, the
railway station on the song Reng/Chias border, for "reisene in Chime".
The Miasse refused thom entry and subsequently protested to our Chargé
&'iffaires in ceking that this was a disguised fom of deportation and
method of persecution,
On 11 April 1968 our Murgể in Puring rained the @sibility of deportatiun
with o Kael-ço, the Chinese Deputy Foreign Xinister. Le denethood the
anggestion met mid that the Chinese Government gəɔuld not possible agros
to it. further approach was mãe in Hong Kong to the lowJOmina Xeon
Agunay branek there te boet their reaction to the de,ertation of an
arrested Chingue agant, but 1CHA rofzood diiouns the matter,
ben_the_then Foreign Secretary, är krom, wrote te Oh'en Lù en 30 August
1964 about Sino-british relations, referred to the possibility of
deportation for Hang Seng prisoners. The Chinese Ooreznment made nɔ
reply to the letter.
5.
neme objections to deportation are probably 1-
Chinese inability to somure the release in Rong their supporters would
be ublicly denonatrɛtað.
The Chinese are tundemed that the prisoners night refuse deportation;
the moulting ;ublicity would be very
fuboging to the Chinese anua
kebeptense of deportation might prejudice their olaia that liong Kong is
part of Jhine.
- 1 -
OSSPLZENTIAL
[
C
**
13 An
--
2 -
IMMEDIATE
CYPHER CAT A
CONFIDENTIAL
-
+
Head of FED.
2
COPY NO:
+
FX LISBON 343923Z
CONFIDENTIAL
TO IMEDIATE FCO TELNO 253 OF 4' JURE.
FOLLOWING FOR MCCLUNEY AND MILFORD FROM PRIVATE SECRETARY,
THE SECRETARY OF STATE HAS MINUTED ON PEKING TELEGRAM TO FOO
NO. 592 OF 2 JUNE QUOTE CAN WE DEPORT THEM TO CHINA? UNQUOTE.
MUIRHEAD
PRISEC
CONFIDENTIAL
+
362
82
enter - fr.~. SM. 27.5
・27.4
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London S.W.1
From The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State
26 April, 1971.
71
Thank you for your letter of 8 April to
Alec Douglas-Home enclosing a letter (which I return) from a constituent
about the release of communist prisoners in Hong Kong.
It
All long-term prisoners in Hong Kong, including those convicted of
offences during the disturbances in 1967 are eligible for remission of
sentence. is normal for their sentences to be reviewed regularly by the
Prison Board of Review, which makes recommendations to the Governor. The
prisoners to whom your constituent referred were released on the
recommendation of the Prison Board in accordance with these procedures.
There has been no question of interference with judicial processes.
Miss Mary Holt, MP., House of Commons,
London, SW1.
1
Anthony Royle
J
(145181) D4 737490 750M 171 HWG
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
Registry No.
FEH 14/1
DRAFT
Type 1 +
Letter
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
To:-
Top Secret
Secret.
Confidential.
Restricted.
Unclassified
PRIVACY MARKING
In Confidence
-+---‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒IWNIKALI
1717
Miss Mary Holt MP
House of Commons London SW1
From
Mr Royle
Telephone No. & Ext.
Department
Thank you for your letter of 8 April to
Alec Douglas-Home enclosing a letter (which I
return) from a constituent about the release of
communist prisoners in Hong Kong..
It
All long-term prisoners in Hong Kong, including
those convicted of offences during the disturbances
in 1967 are eligible for remission of sentence.
is normal for their sentences to be reviewed
regularly by the Prison Board of Review, which makes
mayaman Tallone to the Governor. The prisoners to
which your constituent referred were released on
whom
the recommendation of the Prison Board in accordance
with these/procedures.
of interference with judicial processes."
23/4
Mr Wilford
Mr Logan
Jogan
RELEASE OF CONFRONTATION PRISONERS IN HONG KONG:
LETTER FROM MISS HOLT MP
1. I attach a draft reply, agreed with Hong Kong
Department, to Miss Holt's letter of 8 April.
23 April 1971
SALMorgan
JAL Morgan
Far Eastern Department
23/cr