In the Privy Council
In the Matter of a Reference under the Judicial Committee Act, 1833 (3 & 4 Will. IV. Cap. 41, Section 4)
AND
In the Matter of Piracy jure gentium,
CASE FOR HIS MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY-GENERAL.
The submission by His Majesty's Attorney-General in support of the view that actual robbery is not an essential element in the crime of piracy jure gentium.
1. By Order in Council dated 10th November 1933 His Majesty Record, by and with the advice of the Privy Council was pleased to refer to P.1. the Judicial Committee for their hearing and consideration the question whether actual robbery is an essential element in the crime of piracy jure gentium or whether a frustrated attempt to commit a piratical robbery is not equally piracy jure gentium.
10 2. The circumstances giving rise to the said reference are as
follows:
1
20
30
(a) At the Criminal Sessions duly held at Hong Kong in the month of February 1931 one Chung Tam Kwong and 12 other accused persons were arraigned and tried before Acting Chief Justice Wood and a jury upon a count of an indictment the material parts whereof were
<4
"Statement of Offence. Piracy.
"Particulars of offences, for that they on the 4th day of January 1931 on the high seas with force and arms "attacked and set upon cargo junk No. 206V and Chung Ma Yat the master thereof, putting the said Chung Ma Yat in bodily fear, with intent piratically and feloniously to take away the said junk her tackle and cargo from the owners thereof and to steal the same."
All the said accused were found guilty on the said Count but the learned Acting Chief Justice reserved for the considera- tion of the full Court of Hong Kong the following question of law, namely, Whether an accused person may be convicted of piracy (meaning thereby of piracy jure gentium) in circum- stances where no robbery has occurred.
SI
RECORD
Case for the Secretary of State for the Colonies.
Case for H.M. Attorney General.