24-05-1993
11:92
BRITISH EMBASSY FARIIE
42 66 91 43
P.04
1.
2
The position taken by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Governor of the Crown Colony of HONG-KONG, which is almost indecent, to the extent that they come to criticise before a court the attitude of the French Government, which is, at the very least, contrary to diplomatic usages, requires some observations.
Firstly, one still does not understand how the Governor of the Crown Colony of HONG- KONG, who has no international authority, and with whom the French Government does not entertain any international relations, would have the authority to lodge a recourse in the
Conseil d'Etat.
Now, the paradox in this case is that, by a very awkward construction of article 16 of the Extradition Treaty of 14th August 1876 between France and Great Britain, the plaintiffs contenid that it is the Governor of the Crown Colony of HÔNG-KONG who would have been
empowered to present the request for extradition.
The plaintiffs must not be very confident in their arguments; now, one does not understand
why if such was the situation, the procedure of Article 6 of the Treaty which has been used
to transmit the request, in irregular conditions as shall be seen later, and why the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland should lodge a recourse before the Conseil d'Etat by reason of the refusal notified to it [sic].
By definition, if the recourse to article 6 [sic] is valid, it should be for the Governor of the Crown Colony of HONG-KONG as the only party requesting the extradition and empowered to lodge a recourse and not the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [sic].
The plaintiffs should first agree between themselves.
Actually, the United Kingdom which has not requested the extradition (and has thus certainly not locus standi, notwithstanding any other reason) attempts to lodge a recourse because it is convinced that failing any international capacity, the Governor of HONG-KONG has, in any
event, no capacity to lodge a recourse for breach of the law.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.