TNAG-0721-FCO40-919-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 14

(

11. It cannot however be assumed that the governments of the

DOTS, or their inhabitants, would prove acquiescent if the

constitutions of the DOTS were amended to withdraw the

long-standing delegations of the royal prerogative in capital

cases; on the contrary, such a change would be much resented.

Furthermore, it would involve the major disadvantage of

depriving local representatives of any part in the procedure.

Governors and their Advisory Committees or Executive Councils

frequently agree upon the exercise of clemency when relevant

circumstances exist to justify this and even where they

disagree the Governor is often able to obtain the concurrence,

or at any rate the acquiescence of the Council or Committee

concerned in his decision to commute the death sentence.

The present local procedures result in commutation more often than not, and associate local opinion with it, and ever. where

they do not the Governor provides a valuable link between the

local representatives and the Secretary of State. Where any

rdevant ground for commutation exists, the Governor is better

placed to evaluate it (if necessary in consultation with the

trial judge, his Chief Justice, his Law Officers and other

local officials) than officials in the F C O (whose knowledge of local conditions and local law is necessarily sketchy)

would be, and there would seem to be definite practical

disadvantages in confining the exercise of the royal

prerogative to the Secretary of State and his officials in

London.

Abrogation of the Creech-Jones Doctrine

(

12. It has been suggested that if the Creech-Jones "doctrine"

were "abrogated" this would give greater freedom of decision

to the Secretary of State, and in particular enable him to

take into account extraneous matters which Governors do not

usually consider. Met for

ch-Jones D 107991 400,000 7/76 904 953