TNAG-0411-FCO40-457-Allegations-of-bribery-and-corruption-in-the-Hong-Kong-polic-1973 — Page 87

Recent events

in Hary ilers

had shown that inf

provision was ‚iculad'ın

Cureinstances where

rect dines of actual corruption was very diffrent

rejected in 1966. As to suggestion (ii), the summary of other dependent territories' different laws which was circulated at the meeting, was not thought by those present to disclose the existence of much of significance other than section 10 of the Hong Kong Ordinance. Nor could it be said to show conclusively that the dependencies favoured a change in the double criminality rule. It was aeed that this suggestion was undesirable since it would serve to highlight the particular Hong Kong provision. Suggestion (iii), which had not been examined in depth by the FCC, seemed to raise questions well beyond the field of the problem being discussed eni it was agreed that this suggestion should not be rursued.

(a) After discussion it was agreed that, if any change

were to be made, it should be restricted to Hong Kong and that, for presentational reasons it would have to allow return for any offence (subject to the continuance of the existing exclusion for offences carrying less than 12 months' imprisonment, without specifying the Frevention of Bribery Ordinance.

Grey, Offer, Mimites (e) Although the 700 had scrutinised and approved the

Inc mais Section 10. Hong Kong Frevention of Bribery Ordinance,

the

commanded;

10 had note at this time and still did not have, support of the Law Officers Department.

e

(f) If the offence committed in the Godber case had been committed by a person who did not have a right c abode here under cur Immigration laws, such a person could be refused admission to the UK. The FOU

thought that this increased the embarrassment of the United Kingdom since the double criminality rule appeared to be discriminatory in effect.

to ger,

But seckin 10

(g) On the general question of Hong Kong's relations with

the UK, the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary was to present a paper at a DoP meeting on 5 December. A draft was on its way to the Home Office to agree certain passages with regard to the death

penalty, and corruption and the Fugitive Offenders Act. The FCO hoped that it would be possible to put forward an agreed paper.

4