All decisions made by a Committee
ity vote.
shall be by a majority vote.
29
3
APPENDIX.
FORM
EMERGENCY (REVIEW OF DETENTION ORDERS) RULES, 1956.
NOTICE OF INTENTION TO
MAKE OBJECTIONS TO A DETENTION ORDER.
30
[.3
To the Superintendent.
I hereby give notice that I wish to make objections against a
detention order dated
COUNCIL CHAMBER,
1958.
(Signed)
(Date)
Clerk of Councils.
yu
Aw 490
24.3.524
2
Mr Harris
(1) should be noted in therwise ? ack as
Library (Legal),
in d. h.
-12/4
NoHam's
13/4 dum
2
HoMG
KONG DES 593
15-L-SZ
ソ
·
Seenet
cel 320
3 ye
(Flag "A~)
requires
7MM
·
(Flag")
Mr. Barton
Kr. Hopkinson
Mr. Harris
Emergency Regulation. 116A (copy at No. 1QA on 14237/15/51) authorises
the death penalty for conviction for:-
(a) Carrying or posse. sing without lawful authority a bomb,
grerade, mine or other similar apparatus; or
(b) Using or attempting to use arms, ammunition or explosive
substance against any person or property even if that use does not cause
death or injury.
The regulation was enacted in 1950 and has remained in force ever since.
It was, however, only after considerable hesitation that the Secretary
of State yielded to the pressure from Hong Kong for its enactment, and
stipulation was made that its continuance in force should be reviewed
and would require the Secretary of State's approval every six months.
2.
The last six-monthly approval by the Secretary of State expired on the
19th April and as you will see from (3) opposite it had unfortunately
'passed unnoticed" in Hong Kong.
3.
6-monthly
If my interpretation is correct, the regulation itself remains legally
in foros, since the review was a purely administrative matter between
the Secretary of State and the Governor, no time limit being written
into the proclamation of the regulation. I assume therefore that no
legal difficulty will arise as a result of Hong Kong's oversight.
40
The fact, however, that the 6-mont ly review was overlooked in Hong
Kong, together with a certain casualness, which I hope I am not
uncharitable in detecting in the belated request for approval at (3), is
somewhat disturbing.
5.
Since Sir Thomas Lloyd's minute 15/4 on HKP.488/85/01,
/minutes
|
(Flay "C")
minutes on the subject in this office have repeatedly drawn attention to
the danger of this exceptional regulation coming to be regarded as
normal in Hong Kong and the periodic renewal of the Secretary of State's
approval becoming automatic.
6.
7*
We have, therefore, two points for consideration;-
(a) Whether the Secretary of State's approval should
be renewed until October of this year.
(b) What, if anything, should be said about the
belated request for this approval.
As far as (a) is concerned we have on the last two occasions given
attention to the deterrent or otherwise effect of the regulation as
shown in the statistics for the crimes concerned. The up-to-date
statistics are not given in the telegram opposite but will follow by
savingram. Unless, however, there is a very marked change in the number
of crimes covered by the regulation it is difficult to draw any firm
inferences from them. The situation remains in fact very much as
sumarised by Sir John Paskin in his minute 10/10 on HKP.488/85/01. The
political situation in the Far East has not changed radically since that
minute was written and I can there- fore see no strong reason for
refusing Hong Kong's request for continued approval of the regulation.
8.
As far as (b) is concerned I think we might do well to send out to the
Governor a despatch setting forth in some detail the importance which is
attached here to the need for careful and frequent review of the
regulation, and expressing concern lest this importance be overlooked in
the Colony. have not in fact revealed our thinking on the subject to
Hong Kong since the regulation was first enacted.
9.
We
The se papers have not been seen by Ministers since April 1953 and
should perhaps be seen by them again either now or in October this year
when the next review would be due.
10.
? As in draft herewith and re-circulate for despatch.
I
(I MLittler)
12th May 1954.
am afraid I think that Events in
budo China Mush affect policy wrands Western
the Far East in a
Rai
in
Cheners
habos
harmful
may a that there Extraordinary fronces should remain unts we "I know
where we que
Juan Salon
12.5°
3
ļ
!
minute,
As regards
I
aquer
1
wlty will wine
4
If In Little's legal diffien
unet
of Hong
Kang's failure to obtain the Softs
that
3 سرا
ما
authority for the continuance of this Regulations.
in
in force
J. 8. Haplemen
12.5
I see no med to await the savingam promist in (3)
before exposing
He
cantinames in fores of Emergency
Regulation 116A, since the
not rest on
statistical licence
for reneval does
but
generally disturbed political situation in the for
Est.
1. I
hyper
Hash Hing King showed be warned not to
regard there renewals a
automatic
don't weather w
wand
Vanch
desport for this purpose.
3.
My
to the telegram
Inch I separate
To have suggested
feeling is that the continueres of
this Regulation should be reviewed at yearly
witead
Z
at b-mathy intervals. then require the Govenor to submit
appreciation of the situation
We could
fuller
the wild
be aspopriate may present arrangements
near to me
that six-monthly reviews
much too frequent
and tend to
to become
It
(se for as Hong Kong is concerned) mutter of form.
Hay
Witami
1315.
this day what
ཌ་ ་ ་ ་
Sir John Martin.
I agree that we should approve the continuance in force of Emergency
Regulation 116A for a further period of six months from 19th April.
As regards the history of this Regulation, I would refer to Mr. Harris'
minute of 14.10.52 on HP 488/85/01; you should also be aware of Sir
Thomas Lloyd's minute of 15.4.53 on that file. But with other
possibilities in view, of which you are aware, this is not the time in
my opinion to loosen up at all I do not think that we need wait for the
promised savingram containing up-to-date figures before approving
continuance for a further period of 6 months from the 19th April.
I have some sympathy with the suggestion contained in paragraph 3 of Mr.
Harris' minute of 13.5 on this file for a yearly rather than a
six-monthly review, but on the whole I should prefer to leave it to the
Governor to suggest a review less frequently than at six-monthly
intervals, and hiding case Itzid that thirst review should be in Octo
when the siluating arising out of the freva conference
be aronhit clarified.
[they
S&C. Jeffnes
JBs...
14. 5. 1954.
Notess costuming than when you miniated on 14.10.53,
this is not the moment
Reculation; but there is
Ե
dosh the
much uncertanto
about the future developments in the For Ent
and, though a sudden
unlikely,
improvement is
we need not at forsent distant the
bractice of half park review.
bara 2 of off.
lagne with
? les proposed
JMM15/3
1
Дарм
6.8.8.17/5
I her alt mal draft slightly.
4 To Hong Kong - TelN0353-
Judy 18
18/5754
сл
5
}
Асло 177 Де
Ju
Reb 3
-gives
Mr Harris
an
(5)
gives
argument
14.5.54
ва
6
recent figures fr caimer involving arms
the statistics promised in (3)
مه
tave
yle have
in support of continuance of Emergency Regulation 116A in force. already
approved continuance in force at (4) and have asked for a full report
before the next renewal of approval is considered In the wroumstances
(5) is largely
academic, and I think we need not examine it closely until the next full
report is received.
? but by
هو
2016
Mr. Sicbotham
I
agou
(5) but you
работо
Hat no
further notion neadd be taken
should be
that two
recently
courted
and
scatered
to death
under
do not
hear
H
should
ash
the
informatio
in
here as
to
how many
this Regulatio.
sult of the apperto
yourner for
He quatim ever
Jess one
har
It we
executed
E.R. 116A
This
anow
be
We will
look out for
比
report of the appeal in
H.K. newspapers.
горив
بسیاریه هام
ins
8 weeds.
Another 2 mouth.
27/"" wh
Mwami
28/7den 28/7 akm
27/5.
B/0 nel minute врить
minule 27/5.
Kis. Claud
'su overleaf.
ка
B.4. ref ministe 28%
sayty
289
$10
Bring up
one week please.
6 Hang Kany
Its in
لحمد
1501
draft.
Shatter
at anar.
zila/e
دار
7. HONK
KOMG 白日名 1551
2-10-52
Sow 1514 A
W.1. £4
8 Gev
(૪)
and B/O web minute 1/4.
Mr. Barks
صراف
Mr Harrislio
Mr Pack
ка. сеть 5/5
At (8) the 0.A.G. seeks approval for retaining
116A in force for a further Emergency Regulation period of six
months from 19th October 1854. The "background to this excroise is given
in 12/5 above.
2.
my
minute
Opinion in the C.O. had hardened somewhat
too casual against what appeared
to the
approach to it in "Hong Kong. This was responsible for para 2 of our
telegram at (4)
3. x/ of (8) suggests that Hong Kong had
been guilty of relaxation of the care with which such legislation ought
to be examined.
in fast
regularly
4
I su
no
point in seeking to analyse
I the
7
F
copy
at (lon
14237/15/51
2.
E.R. 116.8, should
the facts and figures given in (8). The conclusion
quite simply that the situation is unchanged, and policy in respect of
therefore be unchanged. Furthermore of appreciable change in the
situation foreseen.
siger
8
5. One further point in (8) deserves noting,
in the Colony at of the reference to opinion
to, indeed on the whole suffarting, as not objecting the retention of
the Emergency Regulation.
it suma
we
6. Viewed in the context of Hong Kong alone,
must accept beyond doubt that the O.A.Ç.'s recommendation, supported by
Ex. Co. Unless, therefore, there are contrary arguments bance on current
policy towards Comerginos Legislation of this type in general, I think
we must give approval.
? As in dift.
hu
I
i
Shilla 5/10
Nr.
The background
minute of 12/5/54
on this file.
to C is given in Mr. Littler's
abo
Please are
N* Sidebottan's minute
$ 14/5/54.
The braic grounds
which
presionely have approved
the continuance in force of *E.R. 116^ are
at / in
53 m
10/10/53
at out
Mr. (now Sir John) Puskin's minute of
HKCP 488/55/01
and security point of vicar
From
A
political
the situation has
and subject
I
not undergone any
my
radical change
L
observatime
wit to make
may think that
You may
mmt
advise He
onct
We
again
S.qs. that
force
ER 116A should remain in
for a furthy period of six months, at least
Draft how.
3.
Jasm and am
Erateful to Mo Harris
for his milite above giving references
to sceline pp.
J.A.8.
9141
Яннамай
7/10
!
Sir Charles Jeff
I agree with the conclusion reached in the fore- going minutes that
Emergency Regulation 116A, should be continued in force for a further
six months.
So far as Hong Kong is concerned the situation has not undergone any
radical change; the only thing that has happened is that the Chinese
have placed their relations with us on a more satisfactory basis by
recognising our representative at Peking. But on the other hand, there
is a possibility, of which you are aware, that the security situation in
Hong Kong itself may be rendered more difficult in the near future if
certain decisions are takon, which in my view emphasizes the
undesirability of any relaxation in security measures at present.
I assume that you will wish to send this on to Ministers.
9.10.1954.
I agree that this renewal should
be approved.
дара.
Oct 14
61.7.10/10
9
9
HOME
KONG SAV 1605_PTY_ESECRET_ 16__10_52_
1
10/14/55
sitiss
In Rigen
Any funder actin
minute of 23/5 he?
Apoke with Mr. Harris.
KD. Clark'
When the question of rencuring approval of E.R. 116A next arises (this
will be April 1955) we should take the opportunity to ask how
sentences have been passed under the regulation since it first
came into force.
marry
15/10
10
Ju
Mr Harrie
(10) is a
reminder
tre 846 s
19.10 54
10
You.
from Hong Kong about (8).
Я сво
Since (9) was sent several days ago, not think
we need telegraph in reply to (0).
might
2. I suggest, however, that next time the question of renewing approval
arises, we reply by telegran if the time-limit is short. ? but by.
I attend a dragt in case
ought to accomledge (10)
19/10
Mr. Sidek. Then Thinker
+
Янчиний
14/10. yes.
25710 al-
Kh linele (9)!
Pirin Millican-thin
fillitseid te ontd
LIL every
Prit
This should
7
:mmins?
。
be referred
widong Kong
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.