3
"Communists. I stand by my view that in this the Pritish Government is being hypocritical and is applying double standards in international relations. The last paragraph of my letter (which you did not print) pointed out that if we show that we are prepared to waive the rule of law when it suits us we cannot be surprised or feel aggrieved if the Chinese Government are unimpressed by our protests when they in their turn waive the rules of inter- national relations when it suits them.
"Nothing in my letter suggested that I did not think Mr Grey had been harshly used, Like you, I am anxious for his release from what appears to be solitary confinement without the normal consular access. The secondary purpose of my letter was to draw the attention of the British public to the existence of the emergency regulations the use of which has put us in a morally weak position in dealing with the Chinese Government over Mr Grey.
"In reply to this, all that has been said so far is that in our case right was on our side - our waiver of the rules was justified, that of the Chinese was not. The Chinese would say the reverse, of course, and it does not really meet the point I made in my letter, but even as to this contention I would disagree.
"Both your and Government's main argument is that Mr Grey was innocent and the 54 detainees were not. I fear that this is an assumption which you, Sirę cannot make and Government can only ask us to accept. For since the public does not know what the allegations are against the detainees indeed we do not even know who they are we have no facts on which to judge. You would not assume that all those prosecuted before the ordinary courts, on the basis of the police's reasonable suspicion against them, were guilty of the crimes charged - otherwise we could dispense with courts altogether. Why in the case of every one of these 54 detainees are you so ready to make this blithe assumption? Government say that law officers carefully examined the cases of all those detained, but we know nothing of the evidence which they thought adequate,
"But if we agree (as I do) that emergencies may require the alteration of normal legal procedures, must we acquiesce in laws which go so much further than neces- sary, in laws which on paper at least are more illiberal than those they have in South Africa, just to cite the usual object of international vilification, Why does Government distrust its judiciary so much that it feels unable to give its Supreme Court judges the task of evaluating the evidence against those accused but instead puts the power, without safeguards, in the hands of one man, the Colonial Secretary? If, as Government now say, these people were "openly and deeply involved in violent activities" it is hard to see why they could not have been brought to tricl. Certainly, even if these laws were justified at the time, they are not so justified now, and nor is the detention of those held under them.
"Government argues that Mr Grey has had no chance to plead his case before any authority but that the detainees have "a chance to appeal." As to the first, if we have no contact with Mr Grey, how do we know?
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.