TNAG-0505-FCO40-570-Review-of-narcotics-problem-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 143

CONFIDENTIAL

Our reference: DDA 74 14/2/3 Your reference:

M J Williams

HOME OFFICE

Romney House, Marsham Street, LONDON S.W.1

Telephone: 01-799 3488, ext.

Telex: 24986

Marine and Transport Department Foreign and Commonwealth office London SW1

Dear Williams

DRAFT ARTICLES ON THE HIGH SEAS

RECEIVED

REGISTRY No.52)

- 9 JUL 1974

14KKC 19/2

July 1974

Wotton

80

fentonto

Mr.

see off. that p.a.

Thank you for sending me a copy of your minute of 3 July to Eaton, of your Legal Adviser's Department, about the proposal to extend existing draft Article 21 ter to give some power to States to deal with small ships carrying illicit narcotic drugs on the high seas.

So far as the Home Office Drugs Branch is concerned, as Turner made clear to you in his letter of 10 June, this is not a matter which is of direct interest to the United Kingdom in so far as the enforcement of our domestic drugs laws is concerned. Accordingly, we have no comment from our own point of view on the proposed amendment.

However, recent close working connections with the Hong Kong drug law enforcement authorities suggest to me that the provision could be of considerable interest to them (although the practicalities of its enforcement may be somewhat complicated).

Although, as I say, the issues raised by this amendment are not of direct interest to Drugs Branch, and with the proviso that I am not at all familiar with the conventions of the drafting of this type of international treaty, I would like to make one comment upon the draft set out in paragraph 3 of Williams note. Undoubtedly, the problem of illicit trafficking on the high seas at the present time is largely confined to traffic in opium or the opiates (i.e. narcotic drugs within the meaning of the UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs 1961). Presumably, the reference to narcotic drugs in this draft treaty will be construed in that sense. However, it does occur to me that in some parts of the world problems could develop over trafficking in what are called psychotropic substances (that, is, drugs which are at present controlled internationally under the UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances, which was mace in Vienna in 1971 but is not yet in force); there is a definition of psychotropic substances in that Convention. For example, I know that Singapore has been very much concerned about trafficking in Methaqualone (which is a psychotropic substance within the meaning of the 1971 Convention).

So far, there is, to the best of my knowledge. no evidence that Methaqualone is being carried substantial distances on the high seas to other countries, but it is a possibility which should perhaps not be overlocked for the future.

The sare could apply to a variety of other substances such as illicitly manufactured amphetamines, barbiturates, or ISD.

The United Kingdom is not at present in a position to ratify the Vienna Convention of 1971, and is unlikely to be so for some time, but we may well come under increasing international pressure to do so. 1 should not wish, therefore, to see the United Kingdor propose an amendment to article al ter which would draw attention specifically to the possibility of trafficking in psychotropic substances

1.