TNAG-1005-FCO40-1254-Capital-punishment-in-Hong-Kong-1981 — Page 43

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

Our ref:

AGC 1/400/81C

Y.E.

CONFIDENTIAL

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

I refer to your minute dated 21 September 1981 attaching

the self-explanatory letter from Mr. Clift and your draft reply.

You ask for my views as to whether there is a constitutional

difference between Hong Kong and those other Dependent

Territories which retain capital punishment but which have

elected rather than appointed Legislatures.

2.

In my opinion the Royal Prerogative of Mercy is one

that the Governor of every colony exercises by virtue of a

delegation of that power from Her Majesty. Her Majesty is not

however devoid of her own power and in the event of a petition

for exercise of the Prerogative being presented to Her Majesty

it would be the duty of the Secretary of State to advise her what

action, if any, should be taken upon it. In this respect Hong

Kong is in no different a position constitutionally from any other

colony including those where the death penalty has in recent

years been carried out.

3.

It is true that various Secretarys of State have in

the past adopted rules of practice relating to the way in which

the Queen would be advised in cases involving exercise of the

Prerogative (e.g. the Speech

reech Jones in the House

CONFIDENTI

of Commons in 1947) but these rules of practice have not attained

Comments

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

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.