TNAG-0410-FCO40-456-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 33

CONFIDENTIAL

3.

Our Ministers accept the force of all these

arguments; and after consulting the Law Officers

and the Whips, who take the same view, we have

reluctantly come to the conclusion that, unless

the Hong Kong Government produce evidence against

Godber of a returnable offence, such as actual

corruption, we can take no steps to send him back

to face trial.

4.

Sir Alex Do-stas Hane

Nevertheless, thepopstary of tate and

Mr Royle have suggested that we ought now to look

again at the general applicability of the double

criminality rule to the dependent territories;

not with a view to sending Godber back to Hong

Kong, but because of the light which his case has

thrown on the working of the 1967 Act. I realise

that our two Departments considered the question

in 1966 when the new legislation was being

prepared.

But having now been confronted by the

full implications of the Godber case, I wonder

whether, on this particular point, we may have

been wrong.

•

5. The double criminality rule was applied to

Commonwealth countries in 1967 as a departure from

the previous law, in a situation of increasing

change within the Commonwealth.

It was also

decided at the same time to apply the double

Criminality rule to the dependent territories,

although in other respects they were not treated

like independent countries.

6.

This last decision was not, however, wholly

logical.

In the case of colonies like Hong Kong,

CONFIDENTIAL

/where

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN