TNAG-2084-FCO40-2969-Death-penalty-in-Hong-Kong-1990 — Page 135

The Rt. Hon. Mr. Douglas Hurd,

C.B.E., M.P.,

Secretary of State for

Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs,

14 High West, 142 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Ms Joglon

King Charles Street,

London SW1A 2AH,

England.

Dear Sir,

1.

917

19 June, 1990

on

We have a standard live penalty. Out you

Ms Major

on

the

to death

setter check with B of R connection.

ights.

B

Abolition of the death penalty in Hong Kong

I strongly feel that the abolition of the death penalty should be included in the Hong Kong Bill of Rights because :

(i)

Human beings should not be putting other human beings to death in a civilised society,

(ii)

The

(iii)

(iv)

(v)

Provision chaA night le life

worldwide trend is to abolish the death

penalty,

There is a danger of executing an innocent person,

The death penalty may be used as a repressive measure against political opposition, and

Statements by PRC officials that justice should be dispensed with in accordance with the requirements of the communist party undermine confidence in PRC judicial processes. Hong Kong will be part of China after 1997. The recent statements by PRC

a severe crackdown on crime, including recent executions, with the forthcoming Asian Games are also very disturbing.

repordues piners officials linking ICCPR center. COLET Cinco

Rights)

2.

I have expressed this view to the Secretary for Constitutional Affairs in my submission on the draft of the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance 1990.

However,

In the past it has been argued that Hong Kong people favour the retention of the death penalty. the British and Hong Kong Governments have ensured that the death penalty has not been carried out in Hong Kong for many years, thereby apparently going against public opinion. Even if public opinion was still in favour of retaining the death penalty (the repression in China arising from last year's pro-democracy demonstrations

may well have caused a shift in opinion), this would not be a valid reason for retaining it. The Hong Kong Government should make the correct moral decision.

3.

Similarly, Hong Kong does not follow all the practices of the PRC Government (eg our ages of voting are different) so Hong Kong should be able to resolve this matter independently.

2116

/P. 2

Page 135Page 136