CO129-379 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1911 [8-9] — Page 348

(nofob donery end ‚ysa ‚od,anin) ni moijoibaiat isívano) NonetE Howe Jeieas of esp eonaniYo end to yoifoq enT .nozisă to sida. İveni and noin eslostado sic to bir goidsen yd,İsvomex Anind I .beit :O BT dae gnodynoi, mywords relinetto els 10 aguaeaq Jeld snijai I bas,toilog Dersbienoo-Ilsw bus brwoɑ a saw ji bajwend ed od now ji dong init of derjor bloow seindmoo rando tom ob Ibine (baeris oven I es Juf .90шnib10 noiðibertyä on es lod on yĺdizaoq hivos Juod yub Jand aniŃS EVO 14 .I .1 (.ba)

.[[VI,rednessqt .ddo

COPY.

B.

Minute by the Acting Attorney-General.

Hon. Colonial Secretary,

со

31593

Race

Rest 20-346

My own views as to the amendments (c) and

(d) were the same as those of His Honour the Chief Justice; but as they took away to a certain extent a right of complaint by the offender I thought it right to make certain that the matter should be discussed in Legislative Council and that the exact extent of these amendments should be fully appreciated by all the members. This was done (Hansard 1911 p. 123) and the members decided for the amendment. The amendment does not however as the Secretary of State's advisers seem to think take away all rights of complaint from the offender. Section 9 of the Principal Ordinance is left untouched. The result is that instead of a Magistrate (who may have no legal training) having to decide as to what is the meaning of "valid cause" under sections 5 and 6 the Governor acting on the advice of the Law Officers decides it. The Colony therefore does still retain the right under section 9 to satisfy itself that a prisoner is not un- -lawfully detained. The very fact that His Honour the Chief Justice is at issue with the legal advisers of the Secretary of State as to whether or not the fact that the offence with which the offender is charged is an extradition offence amounts to a "valid cause" shews that the question is not one which should lightly be left to the decision of a Magistrate. I think there- -fore that it would be as well to proceed as advised by His Honour the Chief Justice in his minute to you of 2nd. September, 1911, but I would suggest that either a copy of this minute of

else

mine, or the substance of it, be sent also as His Honour's minute to His Excellency of 4th. September, 1911, does not deal with the question of Section 9 which appears to have escaped the notice of the Secretary of State's advisers.

4th. September, 1911.

(Sd.) C. G. Alabaster,

Actg. Attorney-General.