GR 255
PRIORITY
CYPHER CAT A
RESTRICTED
HKK 243/1
RECEIVED INI REGISTRY NO. 51
2 3 MAY 1978
Lee (93
१०
F HONG KONG 22033ZZ
DESK OFFICER
INDEX
PA
REGISTRY Action Tagen
RESTRICTED
TO PRIORITY F C O TELNO4
INFO PRIORITY SINGAPORE.
(89
88
Spoken to UND. Tel. will go agreemp
66 para 3
8442/5
YOUR TELNO 135 TO SINGAPORE AND SINGAPORE TELNO 176 TO YOU:
REFUGEES FROM SS TONG SING.
WHEN WE TOLD THE SINGAPORE COMMISSIONER HERE ABOUT THIS CASE HE
SHOWED SYMPATHY WITH OUR DISMAY AT THE CAPTAIN'S ACTION BUT
THOUGHT THE CHANCES OF SINGAPORE ACCEPTING RESPONSIBILITY FOR
THEM WERE SLIM. IN THE LIGHT OF SINGAPORE TELNO 176 WE ACCEPT
THAT IT IS NOT WORTH ATTEMPTING TO PERSUADE SINGAPORE TO TAKE
THEM. WE HAVE THEREFORE MADE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE REFUGEES TO BE
PROCESSED HERE UNDER THE USUAL UNHCR GUARANTEES.
2. IN THIS CASE THE REFUGEES, WHO WERE ALL OVERSEAS CHINESE, WOULD NOT HAVE WISHED TO BE LANDED AT A FIRST PORT OF CALL IN
CHINA. HHWEVER, THE CAPTAIN SHOULD HAVE KEPT THEM ON BOARD UNTIL
PROPER LANDING ARRANGEMENTS COULD BE MADE ELSEWHERE RATHER THAN SETTING THEM ADRIFT. THE LIFERAFT WAS NOT OVERLOADED, THE REFUGEES WERE PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE CLOTHING AND SUPPLIES AND
WERE PUT DOWN IN AN AREA OF CONSIDERABLE SHIPPING ACTIVITY.
HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE OBJECTION IN PRINCIPLE TO SHIPS
ABANDONING RESPONSIBILITY FOR REFUGEES THEY HAVE RESCUED. WE THINK
IT IS STILL WORTH PUTTING THESE POINTS TO THE SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT.
IT WOULD BE WORTH ADDING THAT THERE HAS BEEN LOCAL CRITICISM
BY TWO URBAN COUNCILLORS OF THE CAPTAIN FOR BEING CONCERNED TO GET
RID OF THE REFUGEES AND PASS THE BUCK TO HONG KONG.
3. IF YOU AGREE, WE SHOULD ALSO LIKE UNHCR TO BE ASKED TO TAKE
THIS UP WITH THE SINGAPOREANS (SINGAPORE TELNO 176 PARAGRAPH 3).
MACLEHOSE
1
FILE S
UND SEAD
PS/MR.LUARD MR.WEIR
HKGD
MR.HURRAY
MVD
MR.FIGG
NEWS D
FS/LORD GORONWY ROBERTS
RESTRICTED
COPIES TO:
MR.C.BIRT, INB.,
HO.,CROYDON.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.