CO129-616-4 Public Order Ordinance- 1948 13-11-1948 - 7-2-1949 — Page 4

4

com

an not!

Ms.

시

·

1. While very little exception can be taken generally to the provisions of this Ordinance at the present time in Hong Kong, there is one provision which seems extremely dangerous - viz. that contained in each of the second subsections of Sections 9, 10, 11 and 12. These sub-sections in effect put into the hands of the humblest Chinese Constable the right to shoot (not in defence of person or propery), but merely for instance - if someone is obstinate about moving out of his home if ordered to evacuate(Section 11). The only condition that has to be satisfied is that the force used shall be "necessary" for securing

compliance with the order. Section 10 says the force used "shall appear to such person" (i. e. the person using it) to be necessary. Sections 9, 11 and 12 oddly enough do not include this, but say "necessary" .unqualified.

brake

Surely there ought to be some grater braak

e. g. a proviso

than this on the use of firearms

that firearms may be used only if no other lawful

means of securing compliance with the order exists

(cf. Sections 5 and 6 of the Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance of 1946 copy of the Bill behind (1)

on 54299/46/47 - which incidentally was considered pretty strong meat when it was introduced -, see paragraphs 2 and 3 of (3) on 54299/46/47).

It is true that such a proviso means no more than that the use of firearms, to be justified, must be necessary, but it throws into relief the intention (which we may hope is the intention) that the use of firearms is to be exceptional.

2. Subject to legal advice as to the suitability and the wording of such a proviso, I think we may signify non-disallowance, at the same time expressing the hope that early opportunity Cht be taken to amend sections 9, 10, 11 and 12 on the lines suggested.

3. I think we should also ask that the necessity for the retention of the Ordinance should be reviewed after a year.

14.12.48.

Mr. Roberts-ray

Mr. Paskin

I personally do not feel disposed, under present cir- cumstances of Hong Kong, to be at all squeamish about 'endorsing the firm line which the Governor and the Legislature has seen fit to adopt in this legislation to meet the existing possible threat to public order and safety. It is, of course, a fact that the powers in it are exercised by limited number of Hong Kong Police, who are armed, and we know that a large number of the ordinary Folice in Hong Kong are not armed at all.

/ We