TNAG-0719-FCO40-917-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 26

CON FI DENTI AL

2.

resisting local demands to allow the law to take its course. Quick action over the general policy for dependencies will make the Governor's position easier.

3. It seams that there are only three possible ways in which the present policy can be changed: by legislation in the British Parliament (the Crown can legislate by Order in Councilffor some of the territories but not them all); by persuading the governments of those territories which retain the death penalty to introduce legislation to abolish it or by a Motion in the House of Commons calling upon the Secretary of State to abrogate the Creech-Jones doctrine.

4.

From the legal point of view legislation by the British Parliament to abolish unilaterally the death penalty throughout the dependent overseas territories would be the best possible solution. It is, however, unlikely that time could be found during the remaining term of the present Parliament to enact this legislation. One must expect that if legislation is delayed for up to two years there will be other cases similar to the Bermuda one (c.f. the case now pending in the British Virgin Islands mentioned in paragraph 2 above). It would be possible to legislate speedily by Order in Council for three or four of the territories but not for the rest, including the two largest, Belize and Bermuda. Legal Advisers have suggested that a possible combination of the options of legislation and, as an interim measure, modification of the Creech-Jones doctrine, might serve the Secretary of State's purpose. If the Government were to announce that it intended, perhaps in answer to a Motion passed in the House of Commons, to introduce legislation to abolish capital punishment in the DOTS, the Secretary of State could then announce that until the legislation were introduced into the House he would operate on a modified Creech-Jones doctrine, whereby ke kould in future review any sentences of death upheld in a DOT and in his review would take account of all relevant circumstances, including the majority opinion expressed in the House of Commons. The problem here is essentially a practical one. It is accepted that the ideal

solut