TNAG-1995-FCO40-2842-Drug-trafficking-in-Hong-Kong-1989 — Page 172

BUBBULMANNENKANTTNTTIATIVENKUTINKSTIE: 25 TSUNEZÚČKULT52525252525252525252BURUKKUUUUUUNNERUN, BUNNUSTANTIIKKAULUBBBBBBBQUEST

A

B & C

XCC (87) 69

Page

2

4

Members will be asked to advise :

(a)

(b)

(c)

which of the two schemes in paragraph 3 above should be adopted in principle;

if the proposal in paragraph 3(b) is adopted, whether the amendments proposed by the OMELCO Security Panel in paragraphs 7(a) to (g) below should be incorporated; and

whether legislation should be drafted for Members' consideration.

Background and argument

5

On 11 November 1986, the Council considered memorandum XCC(86)179 (Annex A) which resubmitted proposals regarding :

(a) a

(b)

scheme whereby conviction for a serious drug offence would lead to the offender becoming automatically indebted to the Crown (details of the proposal are in paragraphs 6 to 17 of Annex A); and

an alternative proposal for confiscation orders to be made

against convicted drug traffickers on the lines of recent United Kingdom legislation

legislation (details in paragraphs

22 to 31 of Annex A).

The Council advised and the Governor ordered :

6

(a) that the Security Panel of OMELCO should be sounded out on the proposals with a view to assessing the degree of support in the Legislative Council for either of the two options following which the further advice of the Council should be sought; and

(b)

that there should be no publicity for the proposals at this stage.

The proposals were discussed with the Security Panel of OMELCO on 24 November 1986 and on 20 January 1987. Copies of the notes of the meetings are at Annexes B and C.

7

automatic

The Security Panel was not in favour of the scheme of indebtedness. Particularly it was against the principle that an offender should be required to satisfy the court that he had no money. Members of the Panel felt that it should be for the prosecution to prove that

to prove that the offender had..