TNAG-0603-FCO40-751-Capital-punishment-in-Dependent-Territories-1977 — Page 86

Mr J A B Stewart

wart

WLevoin

Reference......

We have not (sober) used this. Pese word

(see

362)

(350)

"Joods

369

BERMUDA: DEATH SENTENCES

RATES

140LX

No

1. We spoke a few minutes ago about Hamilton telegram No 220 of 10 December giving the text of a memorandum by the Attorney-General of Bermuda presented by the Premier to the Bermuda House of Assembly on 9 December.

2. A note about this memorandum is I understand required by the Lord R

Tor possible use this afternoon if he is questioned about the memorandum in the course of debate.

3.

The note might be on the following lines:-

"(1)

(2)

15 DEC 1977

The memorandum presented by the Premier to the Bermuda House of Assembly on 9 December correctly describes the position of the Governor under the constitution of Bermuda.

It does however contain one questionable proposition

in the final sentence), namely that once Her Majesty, advised by Her United Kingdom Ministers, had declined to grant a reprieve to a person convicted in Bermuda and sentenced to death, the Governor, without further specific instructions from Her Majesty, would have no further power, under Section 23 of the Constitution, to grant that person a reprieve.

This view is not shared by the advisers to the Secretary

HKG 386/1 of State. In their opinion the fact that either the

Governor or the Crown, as advised by the Secretary of state, had declined to exercise the prerogative of mercy at a particular time would not preclude either of them from exercising clemency at a later time, in other words, its always open to the Governor to exercise clemency Onight up to the last moment even if the Secretary of State

as previously felt unable (as in the Tacklyn and Burrows case) to advise the Crown to intervene.

(4)

Before reaching the conclusion in the Tacklyn and Burrows case that the law should take its course first the Acting Governor and then the Governor considered all the relevant circumstances. No circumstances that could have led either to a different conclusion came to the notice of the Governor or the Secretary of State at any time, and what I have said above about the memorandum should not in any way be taken to imply that the Governor would have thought it right to grant a reprieve had he not been under the misapprehension that he had lost the power to do so by reason of Her Majesty's decision not to intervene.

I hope this will meet the case but if not please do not hesitate to let me know.

1

14 December 1977

CODE 18 - 77

A.R.R.

A R Rushford Deputy Legal Adviser