6
for appeal to the Supreme Court as, for example, in Section 137 of the latter Ordinance. Section 132 is also a useful provision.
I also think that Hong Kong should
amend their Ordinance on the same lines.
3/6/38.
/t. Duncan.
I agree
to the action proposed as regards the
F.M.S., but I should deprecate any instruction to
amend the Hong Kong Ordinance at present. I do not
see that it is open to serious objection. It is true that it empowers the Director of Medical Services
to order the d tention in a leper settlement of a
person he finds on examination to be a leper. But
take the Basutoland Proclamation. It lays down that
the Government Secretary may issue a detention order
in the case of a man certified to be suffering from
leprosy. Similarly the Fiji Ordinance empowers the
Governor to order the detention of a man reported
to be a leper. The Mauritius Ordinance requires an
order for detention from a magistrate on the report
of the Leprosy Board. Presumably this does give some
additional protection; but I don't see that the
Fiji and Basutoland laws give any more safeguard
than the Hong Kong law, which moreover provides for the appointment of justices of the peace as visitors
of leper settlements, with power to make such
examination and enquiry therein "as may be deemed
necessary".
#lowed
5.6.38
Han
Zou any
comments?
Am.
7.6.38.