TNAG-0397-FCO40-443-Problem-of-increase-in-crime-in-Hong-Kong-1973 — Page 5

C.S. 84

RESTRICTED

For discussion

on 11th December 1973

XCR(73)219

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

Copy No....B

TRAINING CENTRES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1973

TRAINING CENTRES (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 1973

(12)

A.

파미

Honourable Members will recall that on 17th April 1973 the Executive Council advised and the Governor ordered that the bills proposed in memorandum XCR(73)90 be introduced into the Legislative Council. Among the five bills annexed to that memorandum was the Training Centres (Amendment) Bill 1973, which would amend section 4(2) to lower the minimum period of detention in a Training Centre from 9 to 6 months. The introduction of this bill into the Legislative Council was however deferred to enable other amendments to be made to the ordinance and regulations in the light of experience of the operation of training centres. The revised bill is annexed at A for Honourable Members' consideration; the draft regulations are at Annex B.

2

The Training Centres Ordinance and Regulations (Chapter 280) were first enacted in 1953. Experience has shown that some changes are desirable in order to deal more effectively with the present generation of younger and less amenable offenders who are detained in the centres. Generally it is felt that there should be a sharper regime with stricter discipline.

3

The main provisions of the bill are:

(a) Clause 2 reduces the minimum period of detention from

9 to 6 months as agreed by Honourable Members on 17th April in order that those who benefit from the short sharp treatment need not be detained unnecessarily long;

(b) Clause 3 specifies that courts shall not remand to a

the

training centre persons unsuitable for detention there - present wording of the ordinance on this subject is somewhat more restrictive; those the court considers unsuitable for this form of detention should not be remanded to this form of custody but rather to custody in a prison;

(c) Clause 4(a) and (c) varies the provision for supervision

so that in future the period of supervision will run for three years from the date of release presently it is for the balance of the period of 4 years from the original sentence. This produces the anomalous result that those released earlier are subject to a longer period of supervision than those for whom an early release is not considered warranted.

RESTRICTED