TNAG-0724-FCO40-922-Policy-on-use-of-Prerogative-of-Mercy-1978 — Page 31

Flag A

Now see (4

Mr Cortazzi

P3/Mr Rowlands

CONFIDENTIAL

HKC 386/2

V NO. 51

RECEIV A IN

16 FEB 1978

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

ΡΑ

Yee

REGISTRY

Action Taken

Pull &

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: LOCAL COMMITTEES ON THE PREROGATIVE OF MERCY

1. Before reaching a decision on the exercise of the Royal Prerogative of Heroy, Governors are required first to consult either the Executive Council or a local advisory committee usually known as the Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy.

Sir Peter Ramsbotham (Bermuda) has now put forward the proposal that, with the necessary constitutional amendment, the Governor should in future be bound to take the advice of this Committee, rather than merely consult it.

2. The effect of Sir Peter's suggestion would be to take away from the Governor the ultimate decision which has been delegated to him by HM The Queen and place it on a collective body which will take decisions by majority vote. Since it is rare for a Governor to go against the advice of his Committee the proposal would not necessarily result in different decisions in future, but those decisions would be collective, rather than personal, in nature. However, the Governor would retain formal responsib- ility for action taken in accordance with the advice of his Committee and, in an unpopular decision, the odium would still attach itself primarily to the Governor.

3. There are no precedents for placing responsibility for exercising the Prerogative of Mercy in dependent territories in the hands of anyone other than the Governor. In independent territories the responsibility is placed in the hands of a single Minister, acting after consultation with a Committee, who advises the Governor-General. The Governor-General's role is purely formal and responsibility for the decision rests with the Minister. The Minister's position is therefore comparable to that of the Home Secretary here prior to abolition.

3

CONFIDENTIAL