HONG KONG NO. 245
SECRET
351
Colonial office,
Downing Street.
28 November, 1946.
sir,
2
27
メ
of the
I have the honour to refer to my despatch No 244 November informing you that His Majesty the King will not be advised to exercise his power of disallowance in respect of the Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance, 1946.
2.
As you will no doubt readily agree the arming of guards and the powers granted to them under this measure to use their firearms must involve some risk of bodily injury to the population at large. For that reason the Ordinance should, in my view, be repealed as soon as the situation improves sufficiently to permit of that course.
3. I should be glad, therefore, if the necessity for the continuance of this measure could be reviewed in, say, six months from the late of its enactment and if I may then be furnished with a report on the matter. In the event of your recommending that the Ordinance should continue in force, I should appreciate also a review of the working of this measure since it came into operation.
I have the following detailed observations to offer on the provisions of the Ordinance:-
4.
GOVERNOR
Section 2
"Protected place" is defined by reference to Regulation No.32 of the Defence Regulations, 1940, and, by Article 5 of B. M. A. Proclamation No. 30, Regulation No.32 was continued in force for only six months after the cessation of the military administration, unless in the meantime it is continued for a further period by your Order. I assume that such an Order, extending the Regulation was made before the end of October, but I should be glad of your confirmation on this point.
Section 4(1)(b)(1)
I am advised that it is not possible with any certainty to say of a person who is outside a protected place that, if he were inside such a place, the provisions of paragraph 3 of Regulation 32 would apply to him. The intention appears to be that it shall be the duty of an authorized guard to arrest persons whom he finds in, or in the immediate vicinity of, a protected place, and reasonably suspects of entering, or attempting, or intending to enter such place without proper authority, or of acting illegally or otherwise without proper authority within such place. It seems desirable that the intention should be more precisely stated in this subsection, and I suggest that the question of omending the Ordinance in this respect might be considered if you recommend that it should continue in operation when you review the situation in six months' time.
Section 5(a), (b) and (c)
It seems to be desirable, on general principles, that a guard should be required to challenge more than once before firing at
SIR MARK YOUNG, G.C. M. G.
etc., etc., etc.
firing any