TNAG-0721-FCO40-919-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 77

FCO40 Hong Kong Department Records 聯邦事務部香港部檔案 All

DIE

ET MON

Ref: B05272

Jena Den lan,

CONFIDENTIAL

176

CABINET OFFICE

70 WHITEHALL

LONDON SW1A 2AS

2nd March 1978

HKG 38671

RECEIV

1 0 MAR 1978

DESK OFFIuch

INDEX

10. 51

RECISTR/

Action Take

Capital Punishment in DOT

Yes

59/41

You will know that the Cabinet decided on 23rd February to postpone any action in Parliament to change the present procedure based on the Creech-Jones statement. They agreed that, when they considered the problem again, they would need to decide whether to proceed by means of United Kingdom legislation or by abrogation of the Creech-Jones doctrine.

2. The Attorney General told me after the Cabinet meeting that he was still not happy about the idea of introducing what would in effect be a two-tier system, whereby the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary, if he wished to recommend a reprieve, would be advising The Queen to override a decision by the Governor in the exercise of his delegated authority. He said he hoped some way might be found of avoiding this awkward procedure. In fact, my impression is that he would prefer to act by means of United Kingdom legislation, and I have no doubt that this remains the Lord Chancellor's view.

3. I undertook to put to you the suggestion that, before the subject comes back to nisters, a paper should be prepared on the legal and constitutional implications of the various alternatives to the existing procedure, indicating the difficulties which arise in e ch case and, where possible, ways of overcoming them. I believe most of the material already exists in the FCO; arguments from it were introduced at the inter- departmental group (GEN 99) which met under my chairmanship last year to produce the report for Ministers (GEN 103(77) 1). But that report, while taking account of the legal and constitutional implications, was drafted on the basis of the political considerations and requirements, and does not quite cover the ground the Attorney General has in mind.

4. Would you be willing to take this on? I assume you would bring in someone from the Law Officers' Department (Mike de Winton, to whom I am copying this letter, sat on GEN 99) and also from the Lord Chancellor's Office, and possibly the Home Office. We could consider later what circulation to give a paper on these lines; it might be helpful to circulate it to members of GEN 103 as background for their further consideration of this subject.

5. I am also sending a copy of this letter to John Stewart, to whom I have already mentioned this suggestion.

Reply

at 184

184

Sir Ian Sinclair, KCMG

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Your

The Ru

Cart

CLIVE ROSE

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.