TNAG-0724-FCO40-922-Policy-on-use-of-Prerogative-of-Mercy-1978 — Page 16

CONFIDENTIAL

DRAFT

Type 1 +

From

To:-

The Hon Sir Peter Ramsbotham,

Mr Cortazzi

CGCMG, GCVO

Telephone No. Ext.

HAMILTON

Department

DSR11

...................................................................................In Confidence

1. We have asked Legal Advisers here about the

constitutional and legal aspects of your proposal and

submitted their opinion to Ministers. The legal advice

which is long and technical can best be summarised by

saying that there are no precedents and grave legal

objections to taking away the responsibility for exercising

the prerogative of mercy from the Governor to whom it has

been delegated and placing it on a collective body which

would take the decision by/majority vote. Even if such a

system were established, the formal responsibility for the

action taken would be necessarily retained by the Governor.

buffer

He can

2. At present the Governor operates as a bugger between

the local committee and the Secretary of State.

often influence the Executive Council or Advisory

Committee in favour of commutation and can ignore their

advice if it is ill-founded.

At the moment in the British

Virgin Islands there is a case where the Judge considers

the jury to have been biased against an outsider convicted

of murder. The Judge feels that the circumstances warrant

a reprieve but it is not thought likely that the Mercy

Committee will share this view.

If the Governor were obliged

to accept their advice, he would be powerless to take account

of the trial Judge's opinion.

The Committee is likely to

take a stiffer line than the Governor so that more death

Dd 108087 400M S&K 1/77