MR:
I discussed-this-subjecty-which-is-complexy both in the correspondence-and- the law, with you and lư, Grilsworthy, and I told you that, Reluctant as one is to put any Aindrance in the way of the local governments in any measures which they ▶think necessary for the restoration or preservation of order, I feel obliged to all attention to certain legal obstacles to the policy proposed. My object in Loing so is to suggest that steps should be taken to amend the law forthwith, in order that the Governments way avoid legal difficulties when their plan is put into operation.
In the Federation, as an interin measure, the High Commissioner proposes to declare certain political associations "unlawful societies" under section 8 of Ordinance No.ll of 1947. I see no difficulty here.
He proposes in due course, however, to substitute an Ordinance on the lines of chapter 217 of the Straits Settlements Laws, and the Governor of Singapore will act under that law as it stands. Further, Hong Kong also wish to legislate on the same lines. It is the procedure under the Straits Settlements law about which I feel doubtful.
If societies are registered, or exempted from registration by the Registrar under section 4(1), they can be declared unlawful by order under section 17; that should suffice, One point which might with advantage be locked into, is whether there should be express provision for cancellation of registration when such an Order is made, though this may be of little practical importance.
The more serious difficulties relate to those associations which are not "societies" at all for the purposes of the Ordinance, because they have been declared to be political associations under paragraph (f) of the definition of society in section 2. In the first place there might be criticism of the Governor in Council if he refused to make an order in respect of an association which is undoubtedly political, even if its activities may be prejudicial to
its public orüer. As paragraph (f) stands, it may be contended that the only duty of the Governor in Council in considering whether to make an Order is to ascertain whether the association is or is not political. I suggest therefore, that the paragraph should expressly give the Governor in Council discretion. It might perhaps read
X
"any association which the Governor shall be satisfied is a political "association and shall, in his discretion, declare by Order in Council "not to be a society for the purposes of this Ordinance".
It may perhaps be thought that such a provision is not required at all in addition to section 4(1), which enables the Registrar to exempt from registration, though the position of a society which is exempted under section 4 is not the same as that of an association which is not a society at all, and therefore entirely outside the Ordinance, because it has been declared a political association.
The above point affects all three territories. In Singapore there is an additional difficulty affecting the proposal that, where an association has already been excluded by order under paragraph (f), the order should be revoked. Under Section 7 of the Interpretation Ordinance the Governor in Council is given power to revoke any Order in Council; but it might possibly be argued (a) (not with much conviction) that revocation in this case would not alter the fact that the association has been declared a political association, and therefore would not change the status of the society for the purposes of the Ordinance; and (b) (with considerable force) that, as suggested above, the Governor in Council are concerned for the purposes of paragraph (f) only with the question of fact whether an association is political, and that having made the Crder he cannot revoke it unless he is bona fide satisfied that the association has ceased to be political. If the paragraph were repealed, the Orders would of course cease to have effect; but if it is to remain, I suggest, in addition to the amendment proposed above, that a provision should be added to the effect that an Order under the paragraph shall cease to have effect if the Governor in his discretion shall by Order in Council revoke the Order.
Finally, there is a weakness in section 4(4) in that it is not clearly stated to whom it is to "appear" that the society is likely to be used for unlawful purposes, etc. It might be held that the right of appeal to the Governor in Council under section 6, being permissive, does not prevent the Registrar's deo-
/ision