TNAG-0719-FCO40-917-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 41

1.

CONFIDENTIAL

2.

bsequently to take any action contrary to such so recent an expression of local wishes. I have reason to believe that unilateral action taken by us would be better received.

4. I have also considered introducing a Bill into Parliament to abolish the death penalty unilaterally throughout the dependent overseas territories. From the purely legal point of view this would be the best solution.

not least

But there are a number of inherent difficult1amentary

of which would be the virtual impossibility of

time for a Bill within the foreseeable future.

Lily Famentary

ar.

5. We are left then with some measure to remove from Governors and their Advisory Committees the ultimate respons- ibility. This could be done two ways: either by an outright abrogation of the Creech-Jones doctrine or by a "hybrid" solution whereby the devolution of the Prerogative of Mercy in capital cases be removed from the Governor by Order in Council (this would be legally possible in all the dependencies except Bermuda but there are political difficulties in Hong Kong and perhaps others) and abrogating the Creech-Jones doctrine as far as the other territories are concerned. Such a "hybrid" solution would fall in with the expressed wishes of certain governments of dependent overseas territories and would make the local position of those governments easier.

6. We are, however, committed to a debate in the House and it would be improper to take any firm decisions before that debate. My personal preference would be for the intro- duction of a substantive Motion which would, if passed, replace the Creech-Jones formula. This would ensure that every capital case for which no reprieve is granted locally should be referred to the Secretary of State of the day and give him the freedom to come to his own decision on each individual case taking into account all the relevent circumstances but without binding him in any way on the advice that he will offer The Queen. The fact that the Secretary of State had this freedom would not, of course,

CONFIDENTIAL