PRIORITY
CYPHER/CAT A
FM HONG KONG 010515Z
CONFIDENTIAL
LAST
REF.
NEXT REF
3).
1., though
TO PRIORITY F CO TELNO 840 OF 1ST AUGUST, 1973.
DEATH SENTENCES IN HONG KONG.
나
I that we
had decided t
stay pecetly in we are e listand by 14-Governor if th
La mort
Oreceptimal Care this 16- dl call plenally
I must be brea
I HAVE RECEIVED SIR DUNCAN WATSON'S LETTERS OF 24TH JULY.
1)
2.
MR. ROBERTS WILL BE REPLYING TO THE PARAGRAPH 3 IN WHICH HE ASKS FOR STATISTICS.
3.
WITH RESPECT THESE LETTERS LACK THE CLARITY THAT IS ESSENTIAL
IF WE ARE TO EXTRICATE OURSELVES FROM THE DAMAGING PREDICAMENT
WE ARE IN.
4.
AM I CORRECT IN CONCLUDING THAT IN EFFECT THE DECISION IS1
| (A) NOT TO ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY IN HONG KONG, BUT (B)
5.
REVOKE THE 1947 POLICY ON THE EXERCISE OF THE PREROGATIVE OF MERCY (PARA. 2 OF DESPATCH REFERENCE: HXC 14/501/3 OF 13
MAY 1971). THAT IS TO SAY THAT MINISTERS NOW RESERVE THE RIGHT TO ADVISE THE QUEEN TO USE HER PREROGATIVE OF MERCY ON!
GROUNDS OTHER THAN MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE?
IF SO, THOUGH IT GIVES US TIME, IN ESSENCE IT MERELY FORMALISES THE POSITION REACHED OVER TSOI, AND I TAKE IT WE ARE ALL AGREED THAT
SUCH A CASE MUST ON NO ACCOUNT BE REPEATED. IT IS THEREFORE A ·
THOROUGHLY DANGEROUS POSITION ON WHICH TO STAND UNLESS COUPLED WITH
CONTINGENCY PLANS TO COPE WITH A CASE IN WHICH A REPRIEVE IN HONG
KONG WAS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE LAW AS IT STANDS. WHILE I CAN GUARANTEE 8 WEEKS NOTICE OF SUCH A CASE COMING TO EX.CO. (MY TELNO 788, PARA 6) I CANNOT GUARANTEE MORE. MOREOVER IF IT IS DECIDED TO ABOLISH THE DEATH SENTENCE IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO FIND TIME WITHIN THE 8 WEEKS TO CONSULT EX.CO. (PARA. 7 OF MY TELNO 788). IT IS THEREFORE ESSENTIAL THAT WE WORK OUT CONTINGENCY PLANS AT ONCE.
6. PLEASE THEREFORE LET ME KNOW :
!
CONFIDENTIAL
/ (A) WHETHER
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.