CONFIDENTIAL
154045
MDLIAN 7121
PERSONS.
(B) UNDER (IX), EMBEZZLEMENT AND FISCAL OFFENCES INVOLVING FRAUD.
(C) UNDER (XXVI), OFFENCES CREATED AS A RESULT OF DECISIONS OF
INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS WHICH ARE BINDING ON THE PARTIES (E.G. MANDATORY RESOLUTIONS OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL).
(D) CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION.
(E) OFFENCES AGAINST THE LAW RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION.
(F) ARRANGING, FOR FINANCIAL GAIN, THE ILLEGAL ENTRY OF PERSONS INTO THE JURISDICTION OF THE REQUESTING PARTY. (INSERTED AT DUTCH
REQUEST TO COUNTER LARGE-SCALE ORGANISED ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION INTO EUROPE).
(G) ANY OTHER OFFENCES FOR WHICH SURRENDER MAY BE GRANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF BOTH PARTIES (A SWEEP-UP CLAUSE.)
SURRENDER OF NATIONALS (ARTICLE 3)
6. ARTICLE 3 OF THE MODEL WAS ACCEPTED BY THE DUTCH WITH NO
ALTERATION.
ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF REFUSAL (FORMERLY ARTICLE 15)
7 PARAGRAPH (D) WAS REWORDED AND EXPANDED ALONG THE LINES OF ARTICLE 4(H) OF THE UN MODEL. THIS LED THE DUTCH TO DROP THEIR EARLIER REQUEST TO INCLUDE MEMBERSHIP OF A SOCIAL GROUP IN THE POLITICAL EXCEPTION ARTICLE (ARTICLE 6).
CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION (FORMERLY ARTICLE 7)
8. THE DUTCH WERE VERY CONCERNED NOT (NOT) TO USE PRC DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS POST-1997. IN THIS CONNECTION THEY INTEND TO PROPOSE TO YOU THAT ALL FUTURE COMMUNICATIONS UNDER THE EXISTING TREATY BE THROUGH THE CONSULATE GENERAL OF THE NETHERLANDS IN HONG KONG. THE DUTCH HANDED US A DRAFT DIPLOMATIC NOTE TO YOU. TEXT IN MIFT.
CONCURRENT REQUESTS (FORMERLY ARTICLE 9 (2))
9. THE DUTCH SAID THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT TREATY OBLIGATIONS (FOR THE SURRENDER OF FUGITIVE OFFENDERS) SHOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER NON-TREATY OBLIGATIONS E.G. THE COMMONWEALTH SCHEME OR (FUTURE) RENDITION TO CHINA. WE DID NOT COMMENT AND THE MODEL AGREEMENT TEXT REMAINS AS IT IS.
2
PAGE
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.