TNAG-1216-FCO40-1519-Extradition-treaties-between-Hong-Kong-and-other-countries-1982 — Page 143

GR 1303

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

DESKBY BOTH 231200Z

FM HONG KONG 201815Z DEC 82

TO IMMEDIATE FCO

TELEGRAM NUMBER 1496 OF 20 DECEMBER

INFO IMMEDIATE LISBON

EXTRADITION OF FUGITIVES TO MACAU

I

Spoke 15

C. Howells

Lewia

arrange

for NTD todial

Comments

Us, FED, Cons.)

YJED

I loathin

Karm.D.

Thought

1. ON WEDNESDAY DECEMBER 22 I SHALL SIGN WARRANTS OF SURRENDER IN RESPECT OF FIVE FUGITIVES IN RESPONSE TO AN APPLICATION FOR

EXTRADITION MADE TO ME BY THE CONSUL-GENERAL OF PORTUGAL ON 14

JUNE 1982. THE FUGITIVES, FIVE OF WHOM WERE BORN IN HONG KONG,

WERE CONVICTED BY THE PUBLIC COURT OF MACAU IN MARCH 1980 OF

MURDER IRISING OUT OF AN AFFRAY IN MACAU WHICH TOOK PLACE IN

JUNE 1978. THE CONVICTION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

IN LISBON IN JULY 1980 ON GROUNDS THAT IT WAS NOT PROVED THAT

THE FUGITIVE CRIMINALS, ALTHOUGH MEMBERS OF A GROUP OF ABOUT 30

MEN WHO ENGAGED IN THE ASSAULT WHICH LED TO THE DEATH OF TWO

OF THE ASSAULTED, HAD THEMSELVES ASSAULTED ANYONE OF THE VICTIMS

NOR, ACCORDING TO PORTUGUESE LAW, THAT THEY WERE CO-AUTHORS OF

THE CRIME. THE FUGITIVES WERE RELEASED AND RETURNED TO HONG KONG.

BY A DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PORTUGAL SITTING IN LISBON

IN JANUARY 1981 THE CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES WERE REINSTATED

AND IN JUNE 1932 WARRANTS FOR THEIR ARREST WERE ISSUED BY THE

JUDGE OF THE DISTRICT OF MACAU.

2. IN THE HEARINGS IN HONG KONG ON THE APPLICATION FOR EXTRADITION

A NUMBER OF ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED AND THE MAGISTRATE CONCERNED

HAS EXPRESSED HIS CONCERN ON

(A) THE APPARENT LACK OF CONSULAR ASSISTANCE AFFORDED TO THE

FUGITIVE CRIMINALS WHILST THEY WERE IN MACAU AWAITING TRIAL:

(B) THE EVIDENCE AS TO IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES IN MACAU:

(C) THE DELAY BETWEEN ARREST AND TRIAL IN MACAU, AND BETWEEN

THE DEPARTURE FROM MACAU OF THE FUGITIVE CRIMINALS AND THE REQUEST

FOR EXTRADITION: AND

(D) THE ALLEGATION THAT THE FUGITIVE CRIMINALS WERE NOT NOTIFIED

OF THE APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT.

A FURTHER POINT RAISED WAS THAT ALTHOUGH A LAWYER IN LISBON WHOSE

NAME AND ADDRESS WERE SEPCIFIED, WAS NOTIFIED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS OF THE APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURE HE, DECIDED NOT

TO CONTEST THE CHARGE'' AND DID NOT APPEAR.

3. NO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS INVOLVED BUT MOST OF THE FUGITIVES WERE

CENTENCED TO 23 YEARS IMPRISONMENT WITH HARD LABOUR.

4. INFORMAL ENQUIRIES THROUGH THE PORTUGUESE CONSUL-GENERAL HAVE

PRODUCED EXPLANATIONS ON THE POINTS ABOVE, AS FOLLOWS:

(1) IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO INFORM THE FUGITIVE CRIMINALS OF THE

APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE THEIR WHEREABOUTS WERE NOT

KNOWN AND EXTRADITION COULD NOT BE SOUGHT UNTIL THE WHEREABOUTS

OF THE FUGITIVES HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED.

(2) IN ACCORDANCE WITH PORTUGUESE LAW, THEIR REPRESENTATIVE

(LAWYER IN PORTUGAL) WAS NOTIFIED OF THE APPEAL TO THE SUPRETIE

COURT.

CONFIDENTIAL

1(3)

1

, муж

might be politially diffimet स् food it Si Ex agreed

تھا

extradition

A