TNAG-1005-FCO40-1254-Capital-punishment-in-Hong-Kong-1981 — Page 28

The Creech Jones "DOCTRINE"

Enclosure No. 1 to Circular despatch of 12th December,

COLONIAL EMPIRE

Administration of Justice (Capital Cases)

1

1947

Mr. Dumpleton asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is now able to make a statement regarding procedure in capital cases in the Colonics.

Mr. Creech Jones: Yes. On 3rd April, I promised a further statement regarding procedure in capital cases in the Colonies.

The administration of Justice in criminal matters in the Colonies follows broadly the system in this country, and there is for most Colonies a Court of Appeal corresponding to the Court of Criminal Appeal here. Every convicted person has the right to petition the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for special leave to appeal from a decision of a Colonial court, and this right is frequently exercised in capital cases.

f

In the Apedwa case the initial cause of delay was the fact that the first petition to the Privy Council was not lodged by the accused's advisers until eight months after the date of the dismissal of the appeal by the West African Court of Appeal. The second main cause of delay was the course which the advisers of the convicted men took (a course which is without precedent in the experience of the Colonial Office) of trying to upset the convictions by taking the various proceedings of which I told the House in my statement of the 5th March. These proceedings led to three further petitions to the Privy Council, all of which have been dismissed; and the Judicial Committee have themselves expressed their "grave concern and disapproval" regarding the course

followed.

I have been in consultation with the Lord Chancellor and the Law Officers on the question of the steps that can be taken to avoid, for the future, such delays as occurred in the Gold Coast case. To secure the lodging of a petition without delay, rules have been made within the last two or three years by Colonial Governors fixing a time within which the various steps must be taken, both in the Colony and here, leading up to the lodging of the petition. These rules are not made under Statute, but they are simply executive rules depending on the power of the Governor to postpone the carrying out of the sentence. (When the Gold Coast case began these executive rules had not yet been made, there and this caused the delay in the first instance.) The procedure is that the accused have three weeks in which to furnish proof to the Governor that they have sent the necessary instructions to solicitors in this country. I then fix a date, usually one month after arrival of the papers in this country, within which the accused's advisers must lodge the petition with the Judicial Committee. When once the petition is lodged the Judicial Committee hears it without delay.

These rules will be strictly adhered to and if a petition is not lodged in time the sentence will proceed-unless of course the case is . one in which the Governor thinks that the prerogative of mercy should be exercised,

1