TNAG-0721-FCO40-919-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 105

CONFIDENTIAL

ORD PRESIDENT

OF THE

COUNCIL

recommend a reprieve because of the possible local consequences of doing so.

4. We therefore concluded that the best solution was

proceed by way of a Resolution in the House of Commons.

Although the Creech-Jones doctrine itself was announced in

answer to a Question, we considered it advisable to allow a

proposal for changing it to de debated and to be voted on.

We also agreed that this was a case where a free vote should

be allowed and that therefore a Private Member's Resolution

was more suitable than a Government Motion.

5. I would hope to be able to get a Resolution, on the lines

suggested in David Owen's memorandum, put forward by one of

our Members who is successful at the next Private Members'

Ballot. I cannot however be certain of being successful

and this procedure may in any case involve delay.

As an

alternative, therefore, I would propose to discuss with the Chief Whip the possibility of arranging for an Early Day Motion, for which I would hope to be able to find Government time. Neither course is entirely without problems. Although I would have no doubt of the out come of a free vote on capital punishment relating to the United Kingdom it is more difficult to forecast the result of a Resolution relating to the

dependent overseas territories. I believe, however, that the

risk of defeat is slight and one that we must take. Elwyn Jones considers that the House of Lords will also wish to

discuss the question, but any conclusion they reached would not affect a decision taken by the House of Commons to

abandon the Creech-Jones doctrine.

6. I should be glad to know whether you agree with the

procedure proposed and whether you wish me to report our conclusions orally to the Cabinet before putting it into action.

- 2 -

CONFIDENTIAL

/ 7.

Page 105Page 106