TNAG-2584-FCO40-3772-Extradition-agreements-between-Hong-Kong-and-Malaysia-1992 — Page 48

For decision on

25 February 1992

CONFIDENTIAL

ANNEX

Blue Volume XXXXIK(19)

XCX(92)12 Copy No.

MEMORANDUM FOR EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

EXTRADITION: DEATH PENALTY

THE PROBLEM

Our model extradition agreement provides that surrender for death penalty offences may be refused in the absence of sufficient assurances that the death penalty will not be carried out. This is unacceptable to the Malaysians, who have proposed in negotiations that there should be no right to refuse surrender where the death penalty offence is one of drug trafficking or one which threatens the security of the requesting Party and involves firearms, ammunition or explosives. This is unacceptable to us. If the negotiations are to be taken forward, we need to consider whether there is room for compromise.

RECOMMENDATION AND ADVICE SOUGHT

2

It is recommended that we should continue to require assurances in all our extradition agreements that fugitive offenders surrendered by Hong Kong will not be executed. Members will be asked to advise whether this recommendation should be approved.

BACKGROUND

3

On 27 January 1987, after considering memorandum XCX(87)8, Members advised, inter alia, that Hong Kong should have its own bilateral for multilateral) extradition agreements, implemented by suitable domestic legislation. Members further advised that any such arrangements should retain all existing safeguards for fugitives and should be entered into only with countries with juridical systems compatible with Hong Kong's. On 13 May 1987, after considering memorandum XCX(87)82, Members advised that negotiations should be on the basis of a model bilateral extradition agreement and that the Chinese side should be consulted on the model before any bilateral discussions commenced.

Executive Counc