{ཚ“ལ་,
ŵ the co
Barranda
WASG &
constitutional)
it would be most unusual to effect such an amendment without
consultation with the local governments,
dare under a formal
obligation to counsel Bermed and the local governments would
be unlikely to concur. If nevertheless the constitutions were
amended, the decision in every case would rest exclusively with
the Crown, as advised by the Secretary of State, who would
necessarily have to rely on the Governor for guidance as
to all relevant local circumstances.
if
10. It has been suggested that 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. What Mr Creech-Jones said was simply
Iin strict low, a description of a long-standing practice; and no formal steps
need be taken to alter the practice. Any Secretary of State
is free, if he wishes, to reconsider all aspects of a capital
case and reach his own decision as to whether the Crown should
be advised to exercise the residual prerogative. This has
the praction been
when the Crown has been petitioned for clemency.
There was also a period when all Hong Kong cases were
considered in detail in the FCO and commented on to the
Governor before he reached his decision and, as already
mentioned in paragraph 8 above, when the Governor decided in
the Tsoi case not to commute, the Secretary of State advised
the Crown to do so.
11. A departure from the practice described by Mr Creech-Jones
would produce a two-tier system under which any case in which
the Governor had decided to let the law take its course woul
The disadvantage g
automatically be reviewed in the F C O.
tend to undermine the Governor's position as the
principal authority concerned, and might lead to more
Abrogatim
of the
Cranch. Jones
فتاه
515/
/petitions
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.