TNAG-0722-FCO40-920-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1978 — Page 102

Sir Ian Sinclair Sinclair

CONFIDENTIAL

Reference

W.235

/not

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE DEPENDENT OVERSEAS TERRITORIES

1.

My comments on Mr Stewart's minute of 12 May are as follows:

2.

On para. 2, perhaps it would be more accurate to substitute "a breach of faith" for "unconstitutional" in line 7 of para. 10 of the paper.

3.

On para. 3, perhaps we should alter the second limb of the first sentence of para. 11 of the paper to read "on the contrary, such a change (although likely to be welcome to the Governors in relieving them of an onerous and thankless task) might be opposed by local Ministers if seen as a device of HMG for preventing the carrying out of capital sentences."

4

•

One could of course go further and delete para. 11 from the paper, as well as the second sentence of para. 13 and the second and third sentences of para. 16 (as revised by Sir Clive Rose). This would purge the paper of political comment on the DOTS, leaving all political comment over for some other vehicle.

5. On para. 4, perhaps the last sentence of para. 15 should end "that would in itself justify the commutation of a death sentence passed in the DOTs in a case where commutation could not be justified on other grounds."

16 May, 1978

A.R.R.

A R Rushford

Deputy Legal Adviser

CODE 18. 77

822

Muit

to

Mr. Ceol (HICGD)

Johns 28/7

CONFIDENTIAL