CONFIDENTIAL
1 145
266
MDLIAN
MENTIONED. WE HAVE GIVEN THE BACKGROUND ON LIU XIANG IN OUR TELNO
1912. MIFT GIVES DETAILS OF THE CASE OF YAO KAIWEN. HOWEVER WE WOULD PREFER YOU NOT (NOT) TO ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC CASES WITH NGOS. IT IS EASY TO GET INTO SUCH A DIALOGUE AND VERY DIFFICULT TO GET OUT. WE SHOULD THEREFORE PREFER IT IF YOU COULD AVOID GIVING NGOS ANY OF THESE DETAILS. WE OURSELVES STICK
RIGIDLY TO THE LINE THAT WE DO NOT COMMENT ON INDIVIDUAL CASES.
6. WE BELIEVE THAT OUR SCREENING PROCEDURE IS ADEQUATE AND MOREOVER THAT IT MUST REMAIN COMPLETELY CONFIDENTIAL IF IT IS TO SURVIVE AT ALL. AS YOU ARE AWARE, UNHCR AT AN EARLIER STAGE SOUGHT TO INTERVENE IN THE PROCESS. WE PUT THEM OFF VERY FIRMLY, AND THEY EVENTUALLY ACCEPTED OUR POSITION. SUBSEQUENTLY UNHCR REPRESENTATIVES HAVE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS EXPRESSED THEIR COMPLETE SATISFACTION WITH THE WAY IN WHICH WE HAVE HANDLED THIS PROBLEM AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE APPLIED TO US.
-
7. PARA 7.8 CONTAINS A MISUNDERSTANDING. WE NEVER SOUGHT, NOR DID ANY COUNTRY OFFER, A QUOTA FOR THE RESETTLEMENT OF CHINESE REFUGEES. WE HAVE ALWAYS ACCEPTED FIRST RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANYONE WE DECIDE NOT TO REPATRIATE. IF ANOTHER COUNTRY WERE WILLING TO TAKE HIM OFF OUR HANDS, WELL AND GOOD. BUT ONLY IN A VERY FEW UNUSUAL CASES (E.G. LIKE THAT OF XU YIRUO SEE SEPARATE TELEGRAM) HAVE WE BEEN PREPARED TO ALTER OUR VIEW OF A CASE DEPENDING ON WHETHER OR NOT ANOTHER COUNTRY WOULD TAKE HIM: AND IN EVERY CASE THIS ALTERATION WAS IN A DIRECTION FAVOURABLE TO THE INDIVIDUAL. WE HAVE NEVER DENIED SOMEONE ASYLUM WHOM WE THOUGHT HAD A GENUINE CASE SIMPLY BECAUSE WE FEARED NO OTHER COUNTRY WOULD TAKE HIM. THE QUESTION OF QUOTAS IS THEREFORE IRRELEVANT.
FORD
YYYY
DISTRIBUTION
46
ΜΑΙΝ
46
LIMITED
HKD
FED
UND
RAD
WNW N
PAGE
NEWS D
LEGAL ADVISERS
SIR J COLES
MR BURNS
2
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.