CO129-604-6 Immigration- control over entry from China 1-1-1947 - 4-1-1950 — Page 14

24. F.O.

25. H.K

Mr. Sidebotham

1.

w/rond

is attached at

Reflaght

at red flag B

cf and flag C

2.

F.12808/10111/10 (Ref.22)

tel. 1163

We spoke about these papers.

29-8-49

14 29-8-49

I see no objection to Mr. Radford's draft telegram and have passed it. subject to one small amendment which is -indicated)in para. 7 below.

3.

I have, however, read and considered Mr. de Comarmond's Note on the provisions of the Immigrants Control Ordinance, 1949, which was sent out under cover of (13) on this file; and, as I mentioned to you in conversation, there are some passages in it which are not altogether in accord with the general principles which have been laid down as to the deportation of British subjects from the Colohies.

At your request therefore, I am indicating the passages I had in mind when I spoke.

4.

At "A" in pencit), in his preliminary remarks, Mr. de Comarmond pointed out that the Ordinance contains no provision for deportation by the Governor of an immigrant whose presence in the Colony was unlawful.

It is stated in paragraph 6 of the Report of the Departmental Committee on the Deportation of British subjects from the Colonies etc. (Miscellaneous No.447) (a copy of which you have received and which I refer to

below as

"the Report of 1933, that a deportation order should, in all cases be preceded by a judicial enquiry or judicial proceedings. I think that, normally, this principle should be applied in immigration legislation, just as much as in deportation legislation. But I am not suggesting that Hong Kong's present circumstances are normal.

I must, of course, point out that there was absolutely no reason why Mr. de Comarmond should have been aware of the existence of the Report of 1933, and/know of it, because deportation and immigration are topics within my particular assignment.

'5. At B, in his preliminary remarks, Mr. de Comarmond

referred to the Kenya Immigration (Control) Ordinance, 1948, (copy attached, and, in particular suggested that the Hong Kong authorities might consider the advisability of adopting a provision on the lines of section 5(3) of that Ordinance.

I attach a copy extract of a minute of mine dated 18/5/49, which sets out shortly the reasons why Sir Kenneth Roberts-Wray and I dislike this Kenya Ordinance generally, and section 5(3) of it in particular.

Again there was no reason why Mr. de Comarmond should have been aware of our dislike of this Ordinance, nor any reason why he himself should have taken exception to it unaware as he was of the general "deportation" background. From the local standpoint, an enactment of this kind is often a very handy addition to a Colony's legislation!

6.

There are also some comments which I fed I ought to make on this Ordinance:

(i) Section 2(1)

-

definition of "alien".

(a) I think that there should be inserted, after

the words "British protected persons", the following words:-

/ "....