TNAG-2421-FCO40-3523-Hong-Kong-Her-Majesty-s-Overseas-Civil-Service-(HMOCS)-poli-1992 — Page 28

of his earned pension, irrespective of having reached retiring age, and to receive the balance of his pension five years before normal retiring age.

An officer who has been compensated for being superceded will not be eligible for further compensation on that ground but may have an adjustment made to his compensation if he is subsequently required to retire. (Will this provision survive 1997 ?)

Under the HMG scheme:

every HMOCS officer in service on 30th June 1997 - is entitled to [one fifth of the

d

sum calculated at the lower rate* ;

is only entitled to retire on

pension if he is subject to Cap 89,

is 45 or over and the Governor approves, or to retire with a deferred pension if he is subject to Cap 99, has 10 years qualifying service and the Sec CS approves;

every former HMOCS officer in service on subsequent payment date -

is entitled to a payment of [one eighth of the sum originally calculated for the purpose of the payment on 30th June 1997.

* The lower rate in this case is the rate applied to the sterling equivalent of the salary of the post in 1992 increased by the UK RIP, and may be different from the sterling equivalent of the salary of the post in 1997.

Officers referred to in para 2 b), c), d) or e), retire, so there should be no issue about their continuing to serve or being induced to continue to serve. Even if there were a question of re-employment, it would be reasonable to take the line that their service had been brought to an end in circumstances in which they had been adequately compensated, and if they wished to take up further service that was entirely a matter for them. could be no question of further compensation, and HMG had no intention of providing any inducement payment.

There

The position with officers who fall under para 2 a) is less straight forward. They do not need to retire, but can continue to serve. They will have received compensation, but at the lower level, and they may seek to argue that such compensation only goes to supercession and does not relate to withdrawl of the S of S protection or a change in sovereignty; they should, therefore, be entitled to the compensation provided by HMG's scheme.

2