TNAG-0003-FCO40-39-Commission-of-Enquiry-into-the-Kowloon-disturbances-addition-1968 — Page 91

PART IV

THE MEASURES TAKEN TO DEAL WITH THE DISTURBANCES

71

anticipation, but it must also, of course, have tended to increase the numbers in the street.

263. With the aid of hindsight, both the Commissioner of Police and Mr. SUTCLIFFE agreed that if a curfew had been imposed earlier in the evening of April 7th the disturbances of that night would probably have been avoided. We were impressed, however, by their concern to avoid undue disturbance to the life of the community, which would result from a preventative curfew.

April 8th and 9th

264. On these two nights prearranged curfews were imposed from 7 p.m. to 6 a.m. and from 9 p.m. to 4 a.m. respectively. These earlier curfews were recom- mended because, after two nights of rioting, the importance of taking all necessary precautions to avoid further outbreaks outweighed the inconvenience to the general public and in particular the heavy financial loss to shops and other businesses in the areas affected. The later curfew on April 9th was justified by the lack of serious incidents on the previous night and was intended to allow as many people as possible to complete their normal business.

265. On the 8th April, warning of the curfew was broadcast at 3.50 p.m. and a further 20 times on the Chinese and 23 times on the English service before 7 p.m. On 9th April, an announcement of the imposition of curfew was first broadcast at 11.53 a.m. and repeated frequently throughout the day. In addition, the advance warning given of the decision to impose curfews enabled steps to be taken for cinemas to be closed, for public transport companies to be alerted and for police to warn crowds in the streets. As a result, enforcement of the curfew was very effective and no criticism of lack of warning was forthcoming from the public.

Conclusion

266. We appreciate that in the circumstances pertaining on April 6/7th there was no alternative to the imposition of a curfew at short notice. Inevitably, with a sweeping measure of this kind, individual cases of hardship may occur but the number released without charge by the police indicates that a considerable measure of latitude was allowed and, of course, for others there would be an opportunity when they appeared in court to put forward any mitigating circumstances. In the light of what occurred on the succeeding night, it would certainly appear that an earlier curfew on the night of the 7/8th might well have avoided some of the trouble which occurred on that evening but as against that, those responsible for imposing the curfew had to weigh the disruption of ordinary life, discomfort, difficulties and loss of business which inevitably flows from the imposition of a curfew. One must also bear in mind that this decision had to be made at a time when it was by no means obvious that there was going to be a repetition of the trouble of the previous night. We are satisfied that the right action was taken on the 8th and 9th