forwarding the Ordinance and they were, I think,
overlooked here in considering it).
The Chief Justice objects to the
Ordinance (1) as placing on the Judges ministerial
or "executive" duties, such as are not usually
imposed on a regular judicial officer, (2) as
making unsatisfactory provision regarding the
rules of evidence and procedure in relation to
the cases in chambers, (3) as giving the judge
no power of "taking any action on his finding",
e.g. recommending deportation (4) as requiring
only that the judge shall report whether the
allegations in the 4th Question in Form 2 are
8
"well founded in fact," and whelter they are feroved or not.
The summary procedure proposed in the
Duke of Devonshire's despatch is undoubtedly
rather anomalous and so are the duties imposed
on judges; but there are reasons (as indicated
above) and Sir J. Kemp is presumably aware of
them. He seems right, however, in criticising
the details of the rules of evidence and procedure
and it would have been better if the Ordinance had
followed more closely the lines of the Kenya
draft. The Chief Justice's own draft might
have been forwarded with this despatch for
comparison.
? We might sanction the Ordinance in (1), mathing subset the commentsin the despatch already
drafted, and say that before considering further
Sir J. Kemp's observations Secretary of State
would be glad to receive a copy of Sir J's draft
and of the report of the Committee referred to in
paragraph
Pa
9
paragraph 3 of 2 on 72773/30 H/K.
Ask
whether any objection to following more closely
(Kenya) the La
the wording of the/ draft enclosed in 22 on
28132/27.
Чатрий
15.8.31
le 9
Pa
(12 Trakman, to whom I mentioned, this
question, said that they
(pinate)
were any con
to keep the lawyers out of
deportation proceedings)
The sections
v
thase
vig. 4 (2) √ (3), §
the C.J. criticises, certainly
wh
which
reem
Jen
to objection. If the British subject is
"examined in accordance with the
provisions of section 3A", that means
he is examined by one of
Officers named
d by one of the officers
in section 3 A (3), or that such officer taker down the record, asks what questions be thinks fit, & frepares the reports on which the allegations are based. The
only function of the judge
Reems to be
to be present at the examination and
37
the
to rigu the report in Form No. 3 schedule. I am not satisfied that
the judge is given any power to p
e 9
Page
Page
examine the
ge 10
detained
Jeran himself
Por to
10
hear witnesses et. but at least it reig
Sam unpressed
J. A. Calder
26.8.31
by what the C.J. sap,
and withe cricumstances Ishould te
unclined to calle to the Commor
asking him to forward a copy of (1) the Bill deaften Sud. Kemp providing for proceedings life a judges in Chamkes, * (2) the report ofther Committee repued
to in para. 3 of 2 on I tome kone 72773/30,
17. Dunen.
7/9/31
1. To froceed J. A. Calder
Mr.
8.9.31
abonce
To Gov Hong Kong Jel No 112 Secret. cols. 15 Sept /31
4
5. Gor. Secret.
23.9.34 Korte cashire of bill Maher by Zh. Leuk, Sir J. Kemp, chafted Sir J.
Kods. Copies
and describes its
M. Duncan
bisting
There seems to be no
point in my
ge 10Page 11
11
adding
Ja
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.