TNAG-1586-FCO40-2160-Hong-Kong-extradition-application-of-UK-extradition-treatie-1986 — Page 241

1

AG

FCO

Extradition (Hong Kong) Ordinance (Cap. 236)

In response to a request from you I here set out my understanding of recently identified difficulties with the above Ordinance, with proposals for their solution. I shall wait to hear whether you would like a meeting.

2.

In a recent High Court Judgment concerning an extradition matter (Attorney General v T.. Broad, Permanent Magistrate M.P. 1985 No. 676) the High Court considered the effect of -

(a)

(b)

additions made by Act of Parliament to the list of extradition crimes contained in the Extradition Act 1870; and

amendments which have been made by Hong Kong Ordinances to the Extradition (Hong Kong) Ordinance (Cap. 236), but which have not been endorsed by Orders in Council under section 18 of the Act.

Extradition crimes

3.

Additions made by the Extradition Act 1873 to the original (1870) list of extradition crimes were drafted in terms that expressly acknowledged that they would apply in British possessions. Provision for the application in Hong Kong of subsequent additions to the list of extradition crimes has unfortunately not consistently been made in such terms; for example the Extradition Act of 1906 contained only two short sections -

"1.

The Extradition Act of 1870, shall be construed as if bribery were included in the list of crimes in the First Schedule to that Act.

2. This Act may be cited as the Extradition Act 1906; and the Extradition Acts 1870 to 1895, and this Act may be cited together as the Extradition Acts, 1870 to 1906.".

The 1906 amendment does not even provide (unlike the 1873 amendments) that it should be "construed as one" with the earlier Extradition Acts (rather than merely cited with them).

4.

So a question arises from the terms of the Acts, as to what is the current, definitive list of extradition crimes in Hong Kong.