CO129-534-9 Law of Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 1-4-1931 - 20-4-1932 — Page 24

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All

24

far as my investigations have gone it seems to me to be sound

I cannot however see any reason why any country

should not, so far as the jurisdiction of its own Courts is

concerned, split up what international law knows as piracy into

a series of offences, and if this is done (and I suggest it has been done by our Acts) then it is obviously necessary to be

careful that in any given case the indictment is laid under the

right section.

Oppenheim states that in its original and strict

meaning piracy includes any unauthorised act of violence committed

by a private vessel on the open sea against another vessel animo

furandi. I suggest that the offences created by the section to which I referred are well within this definition and accordingly

that there is no inherent reason why the section should not be

regarded as conferring the necessary jurisdiction on our Courts,

including the Hong Kong Court; I agree that there may be a question

whether on the proper construction of the section it. does in fact

confer jurisdiction over foreigners in respect of offences committed

on the high seas.

With respect, I do not see how Parliament can deal with

the question of what is piracy jure gentium; all it can do, I suggest, is to confer, if it has not already done so, jurisdiction on its own

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.