TNAG-0499-FCO40-564-Administration-of-justice-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 130

Mr Rushford

Reference......................

20

CONFIDENTIAL

21

HONG KONG JUDICIARY

1.

I have had a go at Miss Kelly's draft to make it relate more closely to Sir V Evans's minute and also to the comments in Hong Kong telegram no. 67. I attach the latest version herewith together with my submission to Sir D Watson. If you would like to review the draft once again, this is always possible.

2.

After consulting with Miss Kelly I have left out some of the points covered in the original draft. Specifically:

(a) on the question of the table of precedence

and the style of judges, we are not yet in a position to give a definitive answer. It might be better to leave this open for the time being;

(b)

(c)

(a)

(e)

the complaint that magistrates and district judges reserve judgment for too long seems rather too minor for a letter about the whole system of the administration of justice in Hong Kong;

while I accept that we should revert to the question of confidential reports and should ask for them, this does not fit very well with the line that judges and magistrates should cease to be treated as civil servants and should be further protected in their appointments. Perhaps we could deal with this separately?

the question of grades of magistrate also seems a relatively minor point which could be discussed by the visiting team of lawyers, if this is agreed;

the points about prior notice of the charge against the accused and about the use of lay magistrates could also perhaps be dealt with separately as part of the detailed review, if this is agreed.

26 February 1974

A C Stuart

Hong Kong & Indian Ocean

Dept.

CONFIDENTIAL

P.T.O