TNAG-0407-FCO40-453-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 17

CONFIDENTIAL

(149)

Flag

(Mi Pendry has

as ber to sae the

Sots and may see

min m

6/3)

157/2

Flag

FUGITIVE OFFENDERS

4.

The answer to the first question is, of course, that

the acts constituting the offence of which Mr Godber is

accused in Hong Kong would not constitute an offence under

the law of this country, as required by the Fugitive Offenders

Act 1967 and therefore that his extradition to Hong Kong for

that offence is not possible. But critics are likely to say

that since we have concurred in the law under which he is

wanted in Hong Kong, it is illogical that he should be protected

in this way.

We have heard from Hong Kong (Hong Kong telegram

No 949) that two visiting Labour MPs have suggested that the

Act should be amended. The Acting Governor has asked that we

should give urgent consideration to this proposal.

5. Before the Fugitive Offenders Act 1967 Mr Godber could

have been returned to Hong Kong despite the fact that he could

not have been charged under the law of this country.

Mr Rushford's minute of 22 August points out that the "double

criminality rule" was introduced in 1967 as the result of a

scheme agreed with the other independent members of the

Commonwealth. This scheme was not intended to regulate

extradition between the UK and its dependencies but neverthe-

less the Fugitive Offenders Act 1967 applied the rule in this

context. In principle there is no reason why restrictions

applying to independent Commonwealth countries over whose

legislation we have no control, need extend to dependent

territories, where we have at least a veto on legislation.

- 2 -

CONFIDENTIAL

16.