TNAG-0409-FCO40-455-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 214

CONFIDENTIAL

L

YOUR PARAGRAPH 13. GIVEN THAT REGULATION 59 WILL REMAIN PART OF

YOUR ARMOURY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION IN CASES OTHER THAN SUSPECTED CORRUPTION, THERE WOULD SEEM EVERY ADVANTAGE IN RETAINING THE OBLICATION TO CONSULT THE PSC, IN CASES OF CORRUPTION, IF THE

EVIDENCE IS TOO DELICATE TO BE GIVEN TO PSC THEN PRESUMABLY

YOU WILL BE USING REGULATION 55, WHERE THE REQUIREMENT DOES NOT ARIE

IN OTHER SUCH CASES PRESUMABLY THE PSC ARE UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO

KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT AND CAN BE CONSULTED QUICKLY. FROM OUR

POINT OF VIEW THE CONCURRENCE OF THE PSC IS A SAFEGUARD AGAINST

PARLIAMENTARY PRESSURE (A SIMILAR PROCEDURE EXISTS IN THE BRITISH

CIVIL SERVICE).

8. WE AGREE THAT THERE SHOULD BE A POWER TO GRANT A PENSION TO AN

OFFICER RETIRED UNDER R55. BUT EVEN IF THE REGULATION WAS AMENDED WHETHER ANY PENSION COULD BE GRANTED WOULD STILL SEEM TO DEPEND ON THE TERMS IN WHICH HER MAJESTY'S PLEASURE WAS SIGNIFIED, WHETHER

THESE TERMS MATCHED WITH SECTION 7 OF THE PENSIONS ORDINANCE.

9. YOUR PARAGRAPH 17. AS A MATTER OF LAW WE FAVOUR STICKING TO THE

TERMS OF THE CONTRACT. BUT WHETHER WE WOULD BE ABLE TO BACK YOU

IN A GIVEN CASE OF COURSE DEPENDS ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES. WE THINK THAT, AS IN THE CASE OF REGULATION 59, THE AVOIDANCE OF AN APPEARANCE OF ARBITRARINESS IS ALMOST INVARIABLY LIKELY TO BE IN GOVERNMENT'S

INTEREST. WE WOULD THEREFORE SUGGEST THAT, AS A MATTER OF PRACTICE, REASONS MIGHT CONTINUE TO BE GIVEN, UNLESS IN A PARTICULAR CASE

THERE ARE VERY SUBSTANTIAL REASONS FOR NOT DOING SO. PREVENTION OF BRIBERY ORDINANCE

18. SECTION 19 (YOUR PARAGRAPH 18), COULD YOU PROVIDE US WITH SUGGESTED WORDING? BLAIR-KERR CITES SECTION 21(2), WHICH,

IF ADAPTED FOR THIS PURPOSE, WOULD PRESUMABLY REQUIRE PRIMA FACIE

EVIDENCE THAT THE PROPERTY ETC ORIGINALLY CAME FROM THE ACCUSED,

THIS WOULD BE LESS DIFFICULT FOR US, PROVIDED THAT THE RELATIONSHIP

WAS CLOSELY DEFINED, BUT WE ARE NOT SURE WHETHER THIS IS WHAT YOU

HAVE IN MIND.

11. MAXIMUM PENALTY: WE AGREE, BUT WITH THE COMMENT THAT THE PROBLEM

SEEMS TO BE THE DIFFICULTY OF SECURING A CONVICTION RATHER THAN

INADEQUATE PENALTIES.

12. RIGHT OF SILENCE. (YOUR PARA 21.) WE AGREE,

- 3

CONFIDENTIAL

/13. IMPLICATIONS OF