TNAG-0260-FCO40-296-Legislation-for-prevention-of-bribery-in-Hong-Kong-1970 — Page 149

11

CONFIDENTIAL

ucle

I fully accept the grounds of Sir James McPetrie's

criticism of Clause 10 and, if we proceed as proposed, will

ensure that another attempt is made to get it into the Governor's head that a major issue of policy is involved for Ministers in deciding that the power of disallowance should not be exercised in respect of a law so contrary to British standards of justice

and in defending such a decision. (In present circumstances we

shall have to ignore the blackmailing tactics he employed in

para. 6 of his telegram No.543: in other circumstances and

other times such language by a Governor would have immediately

raised the question of his continuance in office).

2. But despite the near-hysteria of his argument, I also

accept the basic validity of the Governor's estimate of the consequences of withdrawing the Clause from the Bill (see para. 8 especially sub-para (v) of submission).

3. The two concepts are not capable of reconciliation and we

must accept one or the other. The Department's submission

follows the line I told Sir J. McPetrie I would submit to

Ministers.

4.

If Ministers accept this advice, it follows that they

could not fairly look to their legal advisers for advice on the

line to be taken in reply to criticism of their action in

Parliament or elsewhere in this country.

5.

I submit however that an adequate defence based on the

democratic principles can be made for the retention of Clause 10.

This would rest on

(a)

the wide prior circulation of the draft bill in Hong Kong both to professional bodies and through

the Press

CONFIDENTIAL

/(b)...