TNAG-0931-FCO40-1149-Capital-punishment-in-the-Dependent-Territories-1980 — Page 139

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

STAFF IN CONFIDENCE

CONFIDENTIAL

-3-

internal self-government and against the willingness or otherwise

of Ministers to ask Parliament to act against the wishes of the

dependencies, whether by outright abolition or by a temporary

suspension of the exercise of the death penalty. Apart from this

there remains the very important point that in Hong Kong, where the

death penalty still exists but where executions have not been carried

out since 1973, the Governor is of the view that any move by London

to take more formal steps in the direction of abolition would lead to

serious protests

8. 8.

HD There is however a

genuine problem in the bunden placed

I do not therefore recommend any change of policy. Ministers Ирт upon individual Governers, wh have to April Most them. will, however, wish to be aware of the burden of the demands placed

middle ranking officials, they have to be take a decisin in upon Governors and of the possible consequences. These are both

an wone which certain

& personal and political

"Ministers in me lik me

Secretaries of State but on which required to pronounce.

trinity agonised many

воды

9. In Mr Davidson's case, his conscience may possibly oblige him

to resign rather than allow the law to take its course.

It can, of

course, be argued that Mr Davidson should not have accepted an

appointment where he knew that such a decision would be required.

Itis,

tie However, only fair to point out that when Mr Davidson was

appointed in 1978, he was told that the aim of the then British

Government was, if possible,, to avoid any more executions taking

Thereine ism

place. At all ovonis, He is now asking to be relieved so far as

possible of the ultimate responsibility.

10. Mr Davidson has suggested that capital cases in the Dependent

·

Territories should automatically be referred to the Judicial Committee of

the Privy Council. Legal advice, however, is that this is not

possible under the present rules. The Judicial Committee can only

consider whether a case appears to have involved some legal error

which would justify their reviewing it. They are not bound to conduct

STACONFIDENTIALFIDENCE

/an

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.