CO129-534-9 Law of Piracy- case of Rex v. Chung Tam Kwong 1-4-1931 - 20-4-1932 — Page 31

31

Copy.

Hon. Col. Sec.,

1. I have considered the suggestion in paragraph 4

of the Admiralty letter of the 21st September, that the court

would probably have been satisfied had the accused been charged

with conspiracy to act piratically under section 1 of 12 and

13 Vict.c.96.

2.

The section in question provides for trial of

persons charged with treason, piracy, felony, robbery, murder,

conspiracy or other offence of what nature or kind soever

committed upon the sea or in any haven, river, creek or place where the Admiral or Admirals have power, authority or

jurisdiction.

3.

I am of opinion that this statute is mainly if not

wholly municipal and that its intention was to provide convenient

places for the trial of offences of all kinds committed outside

the local jurisdiction, but within the Admiralty jurisdiction, and that the courts here would not hold that it gave them

jurisdiction to deal with conspiracies and other offences of

what nature or kind soever committed by foreign nationals against foreign nationals on foreign ships on the high seas.

I am of opinion that the Hong Kong Courts have

jurisdiction to deal certainly with piracy jure gentium and possibly other offences jure gentium.

4.

5. There is much text book authority for the proposition that assaults and acts of violence upon vessels whether robbery be effected or not is piracy (c.f.Hall pp.313 and 314; Oppenheim p.500). Some authorities deal with cruising with intent to rob or organizations for the purpose of plunder as piracy (c.f.Pitt Cobbett p.286; Westlake p.185; and Stephen's Digest, Article 108); but none deal with it as a punishable conspiracy in so far as it falls short of piracy.

6.