FCO 21/876 Release of communist prisoners convicted for offences during confrontations

FILE No.

EEH 14/1

PART

DO NOT RETAIN FILES AND PAPERS UNNECESSARILY

RETURN THEM TO REGISTRY FOR BU, OR PA.

YEAR

STAMP

1971

SECUN

N.O. T

UPGRI

H.M. DIPLOMATIC SERVICE

F L

SECRET

DEPT.

or POST

Contents checked

for transfer to

(Sad.)

DRO

24. OCT 1973

FILE No. FEH 14/1

(Part B)

TITLE: RELEASE OF PRISONERS CONVICTED FOR

OFFENCES DURING CONFRONTATION WITH

COMMUNISTS

REFER TO

IN 1967/68

REFER TO

NAME

land dept when necessary)

TO SEE:

NAME

DATE

(and dept, when necessary)

SEE:

NAME (and depi, when necessary)

DATE

SEE:

19/18

25/8

Mer. Margar

SHO

102 $109

RH 109+

на

7124

3/9

113 10/

TALM 113

M Mayer119

"MY HONEY (FED))"

Wazded

FCO 21/87/6

10/12

CLOSE UNTIL 2002

427

7 www

SECU

NB. TI

UPGR

The

Registry Address

Renm Ma

Kin

..271

w Street.

das at the highest graded he alloed whenever necessary)

SECRET

YEAR STAMP

1971

CS. 41A

2600077

15,000-4/71-856423

Re SCR 7/3371/68 II

K M Wilford Esq CMG AUSS

F CO

CONFIDENTIAL

Dear Michael,

"CONFRONTATION PRISONERS"

FEA

1972

COLONIAL SECRETARIAT

LOWER ALBERT ROAD

HONG KONG

28 December, 1971

F. E. Da pr

HE Depr

for action an

-para

118

ли

S please Mist

I last wrote to you on this subject on 25 September reporting that the September meeting of the Prison Board of Review had led to no recommendations for reduction of sentence on "confrontation prisoners". The Board met again on 9 December and to my considerable surprise recommended reductions of sentence for six prisoners. Details are given on the attached list.

The Board also asked the Governor, if he accepted the recommendations, to consider staggering the dates of release of the prisoners in order to avoid publicity in Hong Kong as much as possible. The members of the Board were vorried that the releases of several prisoners on one day might cause local journalists to press avkvard questions on members of the Board.

We think that staggering the dates of release is also convenient to us because it might encourage the Chinese Government and the local communists to believe, as is the case, that we keep the problem under review. It might therefore postpone the moment when the Chinese Government realise we have come to the end of this particular road and are left with the hard core whose sentences cannot be reduced.

The Governor has accepted the Board's recommendations and fixed the release dates indicated in the final column of the enclosure. We have selected these dates to avoid public holidays and to give a stream of releases at the rate of roughly one a month starting in January.

We should be glad to know whether you have any vievs on the timing of the communications to the Chinese Government. It would probably suit us best to make then one at a time about 48 hours before the release date and the press information also one at a time on the days of release.

LAST PAPER

cc (with encl.)

ever,

youn

Ather

(A F Maddocks)

R C Samuel Esq Peking CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

"CONFRONTATION PRISONERS"

Sentence

Number

Nane

sentence

recommended

Previous release date

Revised release date

28168

WAN Kam-hung

10 years

7 years

20. 5.74

19. 1.72

28328

WONG Ting-sau

8 years

7 years

25. 1.73

1. 3.72

28329

LAI Kwong

8 years

7 years

25. 1.73

14. 4.72

28330

CHAN Chin-fong

8 years

7 years

25. 1.73

12. 5.72

28834

TSANG Hui

9 years

7 years

16.11.73

14. 6.72

27993

TANG Ching-ping

9 years

7 years

10. 1.73

14. 7.72

CONFIDENTIAL

'GS, 41A

2600077

15,000-4/71-B56483

REF.

BY BAG

SCR 1/2621/69

CONFIDENTIAL

H L1 DAVIES ESQ

FED

FCO

COLONIAL SECRETARIAT

LOWER ALBERT ROAD

HONG KONG

124

23 December 1971

2912

The Borga The G

Enter

Decan Here, h

FEA or

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS : AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Copies are enclosed of a letter from Amnesty International to Denys Roberts, the Attorney General, and of his reply.

In case Amnesty International write to the F C O in parallel you might like to be reminded that their letter reflects the careless and improper use by the International Committee of the Red Cross of the words "political detainee" which was discussed earlier in telegrams; the last being Hong Kong telegram number 497 of 23 July.

1બ

Yours

illion

Consul-General

GENEVA

Chancery PEKING

Encis:

Chrio

(C J Hovells)

CONFIDENTIAL

pla

Kiss H. Hinze,

Amnesty International,

International Secretariat,

Research Department,

Turnagain Lane,

Farringdon Street, LONDON, E.C.4.

Attorney General's Chambers,

Central Government Offices,

Hong Kong.

2th December, 1971,

Thank you for your letter of 15th December, 1971.

The last prisoner to be detained under Emergency Regulation 31 was released about June 1969.

If he visited Stanley Prison in 1971, the I.C.R.C. delegate can only have seen prisoners convicted of criminal offences.

I hope this is the information you soek.

(D.T.E. Roberts) Attorney General.

amnesty international

International Secretariat

Turnagain Lano

Farringdon Street, London, EC4 Telephone: 01-236 0111/3 Telegrams: Amnesty London

The Rt. Hon. Mr. Denys Roberts,

The Attorney-General,

The Legal Department,

Central Government Offices, HONG KONG.

15th December, 1971

Dear Sir,

According to publications from the International Red Cross Committee, Genova, of 10th March and 31st March 1971, one of their delegates visited Stanley Prison in Hong Kong on 2nd February 1971, where he saw 66 political detainees and Tai Iam prison for wonen on 18th February 1971, where he saw 5 political detainees.

According to our sources of information, there were only some 30 political prisoners remaining under detention who were arrested during the 1967 disturinnces under Energency Regulation 31. These persons were due for release in July this

year.

We would be grateful if you could give us as full information as possible as to the nature of these political detainces visited by the ICRC delegate and whether, if their cases fall under the above-mentioned 1967 disturbance issue, they have all been released, and around what date.

Thanking you for your trouble in advance,

Yours faithfully,

Fillis Hinge

Hillis Hinze (Miss) Research Department

Chairman of the international Exerative. Stan Markude, E.C.

Secretary General. Marti Emmala

PATRONS: The Archbishop of Canterbury, Great Belam Roger Baldwin, President of the International Laague for the Rights of Man, USA. Pablo Casali, Pueno Rico

Lt-Gin. Šie Bran Hörrecku. Great Brita Danilo Dale, Šiesty Professor Ench Fromm. New York und Mexen

Professor Salvador de Madanaga. Spain Joan-Flaveen Lalive, Switzerland

Yehudi Menuha, Great Briza Professor Gunnar Myrdal, Sweden Professor Giorgio La Pirs. Pablo Neruda, Chile Alan Paton, South Afries. Dr. Marten "Memöbler. Germany · Saan Muchode, SC.. Ireland Kaly Profesor Jukus. Šione, Australa

AMNESTY HAS CONSULTATIVE STATUS WITH THE UNITED NATIONS (ECOSOC) UNESCO AND WITH THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE

LEH 14| 1해

cc with

叫

to Chry Riking

- P.A Hom Kay

123

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London S.W.1

17 December 1971

From the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State

20.2

Thank you for your letter of 10 December about the conversation you had with Mr Chang Wen-chin concerning prisoners still serving sentence in Hong Kong after the riots of 1967.

As a result of the rioting 1,832 men and women were convicted of offences and imprisoned. By the end of this year omy mainly convicted of violent crimes, will still be in prison. The sentences of all long térm prisoners in Hong Kong are reviewed regularly by the Prison Board of Review which makes recommendations to the Governor. The Prisoners' state of health and conduct are all taken into account together with any other relevant factors. This year a total of 45 confrontation prisoners have had their sentences reduced and thus obtained their release on the recommendation of the Prison Board of Review.

The Chinese authorities have been informed as a matter of courtesy, of the results of the process of review. Mr Denson, who was then our Chargé d'Affaires in Peking, wrote to Mr Chang Wen-chin on 10 September to let him have details of the releases for the latter part of this year. Mr Chang is therefore aware of the present position.

T Dalyell Esq MP House of Commons London SW1

с. Рекис

Anthony Royle

H.K.

(885363) DA. 196639 1,000w 1771 Suet.

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

Registry No.

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

Top Secret.

Secret,

Confidential

Restricted.

Unclassified

PRIVACY MARKING

.....In Confidence

ILLJJ LI

DRAFT

To:-

T Dalyell Esq MP

House of Commons

Type 1 +

From

Mr Royle

Telephone No. & Ext.

Department

Thank you for your letter of 10 December about the

conversation you had with Mr Chang Wen-chin concerning

prisoners still serving sentence in Hong Kong after the

riots or 1967.

As a result. ft)

and urged

After the rioting 1,83% aipame were convicted of

offences and imprisoned. By the end of this year only

23, mainly convicted of violent crimes, will still be in prism.

The sentences of all long term prisoners in

-detained.

Hong Kong are revieked regularly by the Prison Board of

Review which makes recommendations to the Governor.

The prisoners' state of health and conduct are all

taken into account together with any other relevant

factors. This year a total of 45 confrontation

reduced fon

Cand thus obtained this releasi prisoners have had their sentences reduced on the

recommendation of the Prison Board of Review.

bear infor nos reisidante

The Chinese authorities have not pai

eisiadabiy for de

WILOW+

with ng

vertheices let their

as a matter of courtesy, the results of the

Ithe

process of review. Mr Denson, who was then our

Charge d'Affaires in Peking, wrote to Mr Chang Wen-chin

on 10 September to let him have details of the releases

for the latter part of this year. ur Chang là there-

fore aware of the present position.

1-7/12

COVERING PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL

exter ~/^ SM (122

при погрешка

心

ur Wilford

Mr Logan

عدي في

A.R

K2 22/14

KR DALVELL'S LETTER:

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS IN HONG KONG

Paragraph 7 of Mr Samuel's letter of 26 November reported

that the Chinese had raised the question of confrontation

Prisoners with Mr Dalyell.

2. When he gave me lunch on 9 December he told me that he had

given the Chinese an undertaking to "look into" the question of

those prisoners still detained. He said he intended tabling a

question. I gave him an account of the numbers involved and

said that as the Chinese had not raised this officially fr

some time, I had hoped that attention would not be drawn to it.

Mr Dalyell then said that in that case he would confine himself

to writing Mr Royle a letter. He now writes that he intends

forwarding the reply to the Chinese. I see no harm in this,

Mr Denson's letter of 10 September to Mr Chang Wen-chin has told

them the latest position

3. Draft reply to Mr Dalyell. Hong Kong Department concur.

16 December 1971

SALMungan

J AL Morgan

Far Eastern Department

Sir L Konson Kr Laird

Wilf

COVERING PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL

RECEIVED IN

REGISTRY N. 12

10 DEC 1971

HOUSE OF COMMONS

FEH 14/1 LONDON, SWI

Dem Tomy,

10. 112

Rec. and Ack, 10/2.

F. Easter Popartment

for draft reply please

from He Royle.

10/12/71

عاليا

Chine

고

was

ри

prised

Chang

ل سالم

would

look

Пе

Chin

that

mito

Пе

Guestin

prisoners

shir

Hmg-Kong.

Could

مسا

nation

that

Com

sand

Пе

Chinese.

Yous sine

la Deyen

HOUSE OF COMMONS

LONDON SWIA OAA

Price Office

Plene

discon

this

with

Joh llagan.

10/12/71

th Morgen

For draft reply pls.

MTI-

NOTE

Reference

страстні

123

Confrontention

Prò one

1. Su

Norman

卟

Lave

Walks

Let

se priember

Disan

Geminora.

The

семена

Sunde kies

below)

Max le hose

1972

howeve

have Вере ст L SJ

make

이

риби

Mock hose's

(copy

a Wachad

clearly

mer

progre

during

showed

Time

ollow

him

problem

HK.

его

wadw

from

DD 737710 537664 300M 2/71 CH 3643/2

Lyht

Деорети

Leat

December

те

НКК

4/24

(whing

the

сова

(00)

Jon

Во

لم

1972

8712.

IIKK 1/29

■

Holag kong Department

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE

LONDON SW1

lids Excellency

Sir Kurray MacLehosе KOLO LIBE Government House

HONG KONG

2 December 1971

I am enclosing a copy of Papers B and C of the "Guidelines" you prepared before you left. Kr Royle has confirmed that your paper as a whole (that is parts A, B and C) is acceptable as a "document of roference".

E O Laird

CONFIDENTIAL

3/12

121

GUIDELINES FOR THE GOVERNOR DESIGNATE, HONG KONG: PAPER C

Hong Kong & China

Paragraph

Index

3 - 6

Prosfects

Chinese Representation in Hong Kong

Confrontation prisoners

Hong Kong/Kwangtung communications:

train, air

Hong Kong/Kwangtung communications: water, telecommunications, poste, meteorology, electricity

CONFIDENTIAL

stand firm against, or better still ignore, any half-

hearted moves by the Chinese to alter it. If the Chinese

started to press really hard we would have to reconsider

in the light of what we believed the implications of the

pressure were.

16. I have asked the Political Adviser in Hong Kong to be

ready to advise me, on my arrival, whether there is some

small gesture I could make to

he Head of

NCNA, which would be seen as a concession but would not

advance his position to an extent that would alarm the

Hong Kong establishment. Unfortunately, he has the reputa-

tion of being an implacable enemy of the Hong Kong

Government and I fear that little would be gained, and

much might be lost, by opening up a personal if unofficial

dialogue with him,

Confrontation prisoners

17. Chou En-lai has picked this out as the major item of

In view of the

numbere released since he spoke to Mr Denson for the time

being we can point to a generous response.

But it appears

from Sir Hugh Norman-Walker's letter of 13 September that

no further releases are likely in 1972 under present criteria

or procedures. My present inclination is not to accept

this, as failure to maintain momentum on this issue might

prejudice my entire governorship with Peking with all that

this would imply.

18.

I realise the delicacy of this issue, particularly vis-

/a-vis

6. CONFIDENTIAL

a-vis the Hong Kong Police and perhaps some of the

establishment, but provided the opposition is not

insuperable, my intention is to work for a solution

in the course of 1972, based on

(a) a series of releases (no grand gesture);

(b)

an offer to the Chinese to deport the hard

core whose sentences cannot be reduced (as

suggested by Mr Denson).

Communications between China and Hong Kong

19.

I am glad that the Chinese have dropped their demand

for a through train. I trust we ourselves will not revive

it, as it bristles with complications about immigration..

and customs.

Canton is a tiresome affair which, generally speaking,

brings more discredit to the Hong Kong than the Chinese

Government. I therefore propose to explore the possibility of a direct air link between Hong Kong and Canton. Apart

from the convenience, it would be a practical piece of

"normalisation" as well as a down-grading of the significance

of the two railway stations of Lowu and 8humchun. It would

also be a money-spinner and I think that Mr Keswick has

his eye on it. I will find out, after my arrival, whether

there is any local security or other objection and, if not, recommend that we open negotiations with a view to having

the service in existence by the time of the Canton Trade

But the journey between Hong Kong and

/Fair

CONFIDENTIAL

sean. Yunk you

Sin. Nolan. CONFIDENTIAL

9 belimi TECOR

har

Ref: 7/3371/68, II

asked to on this file.

En. 23,

My dear Michael,

23la

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

cc Sith. Mason M. J. Morgan

D !'

Reached my

28/10

119

The Thorgan

The Cowson My Heroey

ZOLONIAL, SECRETARIAT,

HONG KONG.

13 September 1971

TEH

MiLaird

MW2.

Not v. hopeful.

For

comments please.

I refer to Michael Laird's letter FED 14/1 of

10 August.

First of all you raised two questions of fact. The calculations set out in paragraph 2 of your letter are correct. I enclose the latest list of "Confrontation Prisoners held on 15 September 1971".

In paragraph 3 of your letter you asked about prisoner No. 32869 (LO Lun). The facts are that he is serving a sentence of 4 + 8 years (not 4+ 5 years) consecutive. He appealed on 14 June 1968 against his original sentence of 6 + 6 years consecutive but was given 4 + 8 years consecutive. His earliest release date vas then 14 March 1976 but on 21 October 1970 he lost 14 days' remission for an offence against prison discipline. His earliest release date is now 28 March 1976.

Your letter raises the question whether ve can arrange any releases in 1972 through the Board of Review procedure. We have of course got into the situation where no releases will take place in 1972 precisely because of the dramatic results of the Board of Review procedure this year. As you know, the Board recommended 24 releases at its February meeting, 8 at its March meeting and 13 at its June meeting. Of this total of 45, 8 vould normally have come out in 1972.

In your letter you made a number of suggestions about the considerations that might be put to the Board of Review :-

K M Wilford Esq CMG

FCO

LONDON SW 1

CONFIDENTIAL

muuta

A 24.2.

-/2.

5. (contd)

CONFIDENTIAL

(a) Consecutive sentences. As you say, LO Lun

is the only one serving consecutive sentences. These were imposed for two distinct offences, with an interval of a month between them, of forcibly taking revolvers from police officers. Even if the Board recommended that the sentences be concurrent, giving a total of 8 years, it would not mean release until July 1973.

(b)

Clean records before 1967 and good behaviour after release. The vast majority of confrontation prisoners had clean records in the sense that they vere not normally robbers and murderers but were politically inspired in 1967 to commit criminal offences. The fact that they were not criminals before 1967 has therefore been known throughout these proceedings. Full use has been made of the fact in the meetings of the Board of Review. It

is also true that so far as ve know, those released have not made a great nuisance of themselves but that too is a calculation taken into account by the Board of Review. The Board of Review has not proved receptive to the view that politically inspired offences involving violence are in some vay less criminal and more easily condoned than normal crimes. In fact some members have felt strongly that the political inspiration reduces the claim for leniency.

a term for the two prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment. It was one of the items on the agenda of the Board of Review at its meeting on 18 March but, as Arthur Maddocks pointed out in his letter of 24 March to John Morgan, Denys Roberts found that one of the members vas taking such a severe view about these two offenders (thinking in terms of 20 or 30 years) that he did not press the point. any case it seems unlikely that we would get much credit from Peking for announcing that CHU Wing-kuen and IP Tat-shing could expect to be released at specified dates in the 1980's.

(d) Parole. There is no system of parole in operation

în Hong Kong.

CONFIDENTIAL

-/3.

CONFIDENTIAL

We have repeatedly served notice that there must be limits upon the number of releases that can be made through the Board of Review procedure. The Board is a quasi-judicial body with unofficial members which cannot be blatantly used for political purposes. Denys Roberts has done miracles in presenting to the Board in a judicial manner proposals which happened also to suit our political interests. He did far better than we could have expected. Our various warnings that the next Board of Review was likely not to produce a full quota of recommendations for releases were repeatedly proved to be unduly pessimistic. These successes by the Chairman, Denys Roberts, may have encouraged your present hopes that we could continue to find further justifications for getting the Board to recommend more releases but the Board has already considered all the cases in which the Governor considered that some ground for a reduction might exist. No further confrontation prisoners are to be considered at its September meeting, other than the two life sentences, in respect of vhom the Board will consider a possible determinate sentence.

I quite see that it would be convenient to have one or two releases in 1972 but I doubt whether it is realistic to think in those terms once we are down to a total population of confrontation prisoners of only 23. We have so few that we can hardly keep up much of a flow of releases after this year. The realistic view is that the Board of Reviev procedure has already been fully exploited. Those who then remain can be released only by the expiry of their sentence, sickness, death or a political decision.

I also wonder whether it makes much difference that ve hold 23 prisoners throughout 1972 or a few less. What will bother the Chinese Government (if it really bothers them at all) is that we hold any,

c.c. J B Denson Esq OBE

Peking.

Toms Seven

Низа

barman-bahan

Encl:

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS HELD ON 15 SEPTEMBER 1971

Name

Prison No.

Sentence

(years)

CHAN Chin-fong

28330

CHÁN Chai

28491

CHAN Hon

28490

CHAN Sang-cheung

29863

CHAN Yik

28489

5+8+8+2 concurrent

8+8 concurrent (revised to 6)

8+2 concurrent (revised to 6)

8+4 concurrent

Expected date of discharge

25.1.73 12.5

18.10.71

18.10.71 x

15.8.74

CHAN Yuk-va

28754

10+10 concurrent

CHENG Yat-choi

28669

CHU Wing-chuen

28998

Life

IP Sing

29884

9+9+5+9+9 concurrent

10.

IP Tat-shing

28999

10+5+Life+Life concurrent

11.

IP Yuen-kvan

28492

8 (revised to 6)

12.

LAI Kvong

28329

5+8 concurrent

13.

LEUNG Pun

30412

5+5+8+5 concurrent

14.

LO Lun

32869

4+8 consecutive

15.

LO Shui-yan

30954

12+12+12 concurrent

3.2.73

4.7.74

17.3.71

11.1.74

4.10.71 X

25.1.73

9.6.73

28.3.76

15.2.76

16.

LUK Nam

29279

6.4.73

17.

MOK Siu-kui

29736

14.12.75

18.

SZETO Foon

29281

19.

TAM Fat (alias WONG Yau)

28707

10+5 concurrent

20.

TO Min

28906

7.4.73

26.6.74

16.3.73

CONFIDENTIAL

-/2

CONFIDENTIAL

Name

Prison No.

Sentence

(years)

21.

TONG Ching-ping

27993

22.

TSANG Mui

28834

23.

TSUI Chun

29882

24.

WAN Kam-hung

28168

5+8 concurrent

9+9+5+9+9 concurrent

10+10+5 concurrent

25.

WAN Kei

28968

9 (revised to 6)

26.

WONG Chung

29282

27.

WONG Ting-sau

28328

28.

YAU Wai

29883

6+5 concurrent

5+8+8 concurrent

9+9+5+5 concurrent

Expected Releases

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

Life

Total

10.9.71.

CONFIDENTIAL

Expected date of discharge

10.1.73

124 7.72

16.11.73

14 672

11.1.74

21.11.71 ×

6.12.71 x

25.1.73

.1.72

1 3 72

25.1.74

c.c. J B Denson Esq OBE Peking.

CS. 41A

2600077

15,000-4/71-386483

BY BAG

REF.

SCR 7/3371/68 II

CONFIDENTIAL

COLONIAL SECRETARIAT

LOWER ALBERT ROAD

HONG KONG

K M WILFORD ESQ CMG F CO

25 September 1971

Full 14/1 M. Moga SM L

My Danie

Rear Michael, Kit Ma

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

ен

Enter

~12 (19)

In his letter to you of 13 September Sir Hugh Norman-Walker mentioned that the Prison Board of Review at its meeting in September would have only two confrontation prisoners to consider, the two who are serving life sentences.

می

At the Board's meeting on September 16 the two life sentences vere briefly discussed. Denys Roberts in the chair came to the view that there would be no advantage in trying to reach agreement that day on a recommendation for a determinate sentence. The Board accordingly decided to postpone consideration of the two cases until 1973. This would follow the normal practice which is to examine life sentences only when the prisoner has served six years.

Your

ever

Arthur.

(A F Maddocks)

Political Adviser

C.C.

JB Denson Esq OBE PEKING

CONFIDENTIAL

REE****

Hi Deft entera.

117

FEH 14/1

14/1

10 september 1971

Ar Chang Wen-chin

Director

West European and American Department

Ministry of Foreign Affairs

People's Republic of China

الا

You will wish to be aware that, as part of the continuing process of review of prison sentences in Hong Kong, a number of réductions in the sentences of prisoners sentenced in 1967 have been made. The result of these decisions will that one prisoner will be released on 13 September, whose earliest release date would have been 13 January 1973; further prisoner will be released on 4 October, whose earliest

and 2 more release date would have been 4 February 1973; prisoners will be released on 18 October, whose earliest release dates would have been 18 February 1973.

In addition,

a further prison r will be released on 21 Jovenber, whose earliest release date would have been 21 Bovember 1973. process of review of sentences by the Prison Board of keview will continue, as will normal releases.

I take this opportunity to convey my best wishes.

Blind copies to:

A F Maddocks, Esq Hong Kong JAL Morgan Esq FCO

JB Denson

CONFIDENTIAL

27.9

RECEIVED IN | R.GILTRY No.301 27SEP 1971

116

cc. Mr. Wilford

FEH 14/1

gazla

CYPHER/CAT A

CONFIDENTIAL '

IMP COPY

FM HONG KONG 2572552

CONFIDENTIAL

TO ROUTINE FCO TELNO 708 OF 25TH SEPTEMBER, 1971. INFO

PEKING.

102

110

MADDOCKS'S LETTER OF 20 JULY TO MORGAN AND HIS REPLY OF 3 SEPT.

WANTED PERSONS.

ON 22 SEPTEMBER POLICE ARRESTED A MAN IN CONNEXION WITH A BURGLARY WHO TURNED OUT TO BE HO SHU-CHEUNG. HE HAS BEEN ACCUSED OF THE MURDER OF A POLICE CONSTABLE IN DECEMBER 1967.

2. IT SEEMS THAT HE SPENT MOST OF THE TIME SINCE DECEMBER 1967

IN CHINA BUT ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO RETURNED TO HONG KONG AS

AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT BY SWIMMING MIRS BAY. THIS FACT MAY ENCOURAGE THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES NOT TO MAKE A FUSS.

3. THE ARREST HAS BEEN REPORTED IN THE PRESS. THERE HAS BEEN NO

COMMUNIST RE-ACTION.

FCO PASS COPY HK GOVT OFFICE LONDON

TRENCH

FILES

FED

AKO

COPIES TO:

HK GOVT OFFICE

CONFIDENTIAL

54 PALL MALL SWI.

[

The Morgan.

Reference

SECRET.

115]

You with have noticed that the first sentence

113 of HK Tel No 89 to Peking

is the first rejoinder of

any kind we have had to The Laird's letter of 10

Angust

to the Acting Governor.

2. This will be the last Board I Reviews to meet under the present

Governor. The Chinese will not expect

bout they

with

£304 04

Sir D. Trench

very much from it If they hear of it, begin to sit up expectantly as

leaves.

A decision with have to be taken smom Shether

the new bovem or is to institute any

order to clear

clear awa

the problem робоват

new

procedures in

10/9

дуга

The Reagan h

Под

Mr Willm!

One we have thought

skal have had a

by now

The same thought

14.9

I-

refly to Play B

Las been

my mind. Ithink that we

SALMage

now wait for a report

I have cant a

the

10.0

16 September meeting. personal remade #SiH. N-W. appone sing

་ུཡསུ

1379

SOOM 2/71 GM 3603,2

CYPHER CAT &

FI PEKING 10043OZ

CONFIDENTIAL.

CONFIDENTIAL

D IN

1800 301

No. 50

3971

Kart the

TO ROUTINE FCO TELNO 99% OF 10 SEPTEMBER INFO HONG KONG.

HONG KONG TELMO 39 TO 12:

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

1. I SENT A LETTER ON THE USUAL LINES TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE

EASTERN EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN DEPARTMENT, EMISTRY OF FOREIGN

Fal25, TRIS HORNING.

DENSON

FILES

FFD

H K D

MR WILFORD

NNNNN

REPEATED AS REQUESTED/

COPY TO:

HONG KONG GOVERNMENT OFFICE

CONFIDENTIAL

114

CONFIDENTIAL

PRIORITY

RECEIVED IN

CYPHER/CAT A

REGISTRY No.

1QSE, I§)

FM HONG KONG 092550Z

FEH 14/1

CONFIDENTIAL

COFY

113

TO IMMEDIATE PEKING TELNO 89 OF 9 SEPTEÏBER İKFC PRIORITY FCO.

YOUR TELNO 113 TO ME: CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

THE BOARD OF REVIEW WILL NEXT MEET ON 16 SEPTEMBER BUT THE ONLY CONFRONTATION PRISONERS TO BE CONSIDERED TH EN ARE THE TWO

SENTENCED TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT. IT IS LIKELY THAT THE BOARD WILL EITHER POSTPONE THEIR CASES FOR SIX MONTHS OR RECOMMEND LONG DETERMINATE SENTENCES. BUT IT IS NOT GENERALLY KNOWN IN HONG KONG THAT THE BOARD WILL NEET ON THE 16TH AND PROBABLY NOT KNOWN TO THE COMMUNISTS OR THE CHINESE. I THEREFORE. THINK IT BEST TO CARRY ON WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN SET OUT IN PARAGRAPH 7 OF MY TELNO 87) 471 TO THE FCO. I SUGGEST YOU SHOULD INFORM THE MINISTRY ON SEPTEMBER

10 OF THE FIVE REMAINING RELEASES. WE WOULD MAKE CUR USUAL LOW LEVEL PRESS RELEASE ON SEPTEMBER 12,

FCO PASS COPY TO HONG KONG GOVERNMENT OFFICE LONDON

COMMS NOTE/: HAVE PASSED TO PEKING

TRENCH

FILE S

COFY TO: HONG KONG GOVERNMENT OFFICE

FED

HKD

MR WILFORD

CONFIDENTIAL

IMMEDIATE

CYPHER CAT A

1971

TOP Cur

112

FN PEKING 090350Z

CONFIDENTIAL

FEH 14/1

TO INMEDIATE HONG KONG TELNO 116 OF 9 SEPTEMBER INFO IMMEDIATE FCO.

MY TELNO 113 TO YOU: CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

1. I TAKE IT THAT YOU DO NOT WISH ME TO WRITE TO THE FA TOMORROW.

DENSON

FILES FED

MR WILFORD

[REPEATED TO HONG KONG]

CONFIDENTIAL

and T

CYPHER CAT A

CONFIDENTIAL

TOP COPT

FM PEKING 060740Z

CONFIDENTIAL

TO PRIORITY HONG KONG TELNO 113 OF 6 SEPTEMBER INFO FCO',

PERSONAL FOR GOVERNOR.

Ex 14/2]

MORGAN'S LETTER FEH 14/1 OF 25 AUGUST TO SAMUEL, COPIED TO

MADDOCKS: CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

1. YOU WILL REMEMBER WE DISCUSSED WHETHER YOU SHOULD DELAY THE

RELEASE OF THE PRISONER DUE OUT IN SEPTE BER UNTIL AFTER THE NEXT

REVIEW BOARD HAD HET SO THAT IF THE BOARD DID NOT RECOMMEND FURTHER

RELEASES IT WOULD NEVERTHELESS APPEAR THAT IT HAD DONE SO, IF YOU

STILL FAVOUR THIS PROCEDURE AND LONDON CONCUR I WILL DELAY

WRITING TO THE CHINESE UNTIL AFTER THE MEETING AND DEPENDING ON

THE RESULT WE CAN CONSIDER HOW FURTHER RELEASES, IF ANY, SHOULD

BE NOTIFIED TO THE CHINESE.

DENSON

FILES

FED

MR WILFORD

FFFFF

кво же

/REPEATED TO HONG KONG/

CONFIDENTIAL

For well

A F Maddocks Baq

HONG KONG

SECRET

930-8440

110

Batcher 3/9

8LR 6/2621/67 III

3 September 1971

for

1967 VANTED PERSONS

Thank you for your letter 9LR 6/2621/67 III of 20 July.

I am sorry not la have replied before.

2. We agree with the Governor's decisions.

We also agree

that the matter should not be raised with the Chinese.

Copied to:

JB Denson Esq., OBE Peking

SECRET

(J AL Morgan)

Par Eastern Department

(145101) 06 737490 750M 171 He

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

Registry No.

JURITY CLASSIFICATION

Secret.

SECRET

DRAFT LETTER

To:-

Type 1 +

From

Mr Morgan

Telephone No. & Ext,

PRIVACY MARKING

A F Maddocks Esq HONG KONG

Cc: J B Denson Esq OBE

PEKING

In Confidence

Department

Far Eastern

1967 WANTED PERSONS

Thank you for your letter SLR 6/2621/67 III of

We also

20 July. I am sorry not to have replied before.

We agree with the Governor's decisions.

agree that the matter should not be raised with the

Chinese.

Yea

150

3/9/71

SECRET

101

Nr yfford

HONG KONG : "WANDED PERSONS"

1. I attach a copy of a self-explanatory letter from Mr Haddocks,

together with the telegram referred to in paragraph 1. I fear that the

letter was mislaid.

2. I recommend that we accept the Governor's decisions although

the case against Kr Ip does not seem very serious. I should

like to write to Mr Maddocks on the lines of the attached draft.

Hong Kong Department agree.

copied to

Hr Laird, Hong Kong Department

Mr Ritchie

PUSD

2 September 1971

JALM

igin

J A L Korgan

Far Eastern Department

case

but

Lagna.

عود

seems

√ps

p's

v. un important

can let it

وسه

CYPHER CAT A/

PRIORITY HONG KONG

"LĒGRAM NUMBER 869'

SECRET

TO FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE' 14 NOVEMBER 1969

7 620

282

ADDRESSED TO FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE, TELEGRAM NUMBER 869. OF 14 NOVEMBER REPEATED FOR INFORMATION PEKING.

PEKING TELEGRAM 65 TO YOU.

UNDE

I HAVE NOT REACTED EARLIER TO THE TELEGRAM UNDER REFERENCE, AS THE SITUATION IT ENVISAGED HAS TO AN EXTENT BEEN OVERTAKEN BY EVENTS, FOR EXAMPLE THE SUBSEQUENT TRICKLE OF BRITISH SUBJECTS RELEASED, THE ARREST OF MCBAIN AND MRS MARTIN, AND CONCLUDING WITH THE DIALO' REFERRED TO IN YOUR TELEGRAM NUMBER 450 TO PEKING.

2. WE ARE NOT THINKING IN TERMS OF ANY IMMEDIATE OR DRAMATIC CHANGE OF POLICY FOLLOWING THE RELEASE OF GREY, BUT WE DO HAVE UNDER REVIEW THE VARIOUS AREAS IN WHICH WE HAVE IMPOSED RESTRAINTS ON OURSELVES, PARTICULARLY THOSE AREAS IN WHICH IT MIGHT APPEAR TO THE PUBLIC THAT COMMUNISTS OR COMMUNIST INSTITUTIONS WERE ENJOYING A

MORE FAVOURABLE POSITION THAN THE GENERAL POPULATION. THE REVIEW WILL IN ANY CASE TAKE SOME TIME, AND I WOULD NATURALLY ADVISE YOU IN ADVANCE OF ANY CHANGE OF DIRECTION CONTEMPLATED IN ANY PARTICULAR AREA WHICH MIGHT HAVE REPERCUSSIVE EFFECTS.

3. YOU WILL OF COURSE UNDERSTAND THAT TO AN EXTENT THE ADMINISTRATION HERE IS AT THE MERCY OF EVENTS, A GOOD EXAMPLE IS THE CASE OF THE MEN WANTED FOR CRIMES COMMITTED DURING THE 1967 CONFRONTATION, WHICH IS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE TELEGRAM UNDER REFERENCE. THE LIST HAS BEEN MOST CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND NOW NUMBERS 33, ALL OF

SECRET

/WHOM ARE

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY No.51

25 NOV 1969

AKK 1/12

་་

LANT

REF.

(282)

NEKT

REF.

291

SECRET

WHOM ARE WANTED FOR SERIOUS OFFENCES UNDER THE ORDINARY LAW. OF THESE 22 ARE PROBABLY IN CHINA OR UNTRACEABLE, THE INTERIM POLICY, KEPT

· CONSTANTLY UNDER REVIEW, IS THAT THE REMAINING 11 WILL NOT BE SEARCHED OUT IN DELICATE AREAS, BUT THAT IF FOUND AND RECOGNISED.IN A PUBLIC PLACE OR BY A POLICE OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF HIS DUTIES THEY WILL BE PICKED UP AND PROSECUTED, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THIS MIGHT HAPPEN AT ANY TIME. TO IGNORE THE OVERT PRESENCE OF SUCH PEOPLE WOULD SERIOUSLY UNDERMINE THE REPUTATION OF THE POLICE FORCE AND ORDERS TO DO SO WOULD SERIOUSLY DAMAGE THE MORALE OF THE FORCE.

4. I THINK HOWEVER THAT THERE IS ONE ASPECT OF THE SITUATION ON WHICH WE MUST BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL. IN MY VIEW THERE IS NO LOGICAL OR REASONABLE CONNECTION BETWEEN ANY OF THE PERSONS STILL HELD BY THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT ON THE ONE HAND AND EVENTS IN HONG KONG ON THE OTHER. WHILE I AGREE THAT ANY SUDDEN AND DRAMATIC ALTERATION IN POLICIES MIGHT HAVE ITS DANGERS ON THE ONE SIDE, BUT ANY CONCESSION, WHICH MIGHT BE INTERPRETED AS BEING IN RESPONSE TO CHINESE POLICIES WOULD HAVE EVEN GREATER DANGERS AND WOULD CREATE THE GRAVEST DIFFICULTIES FOR THE FUTURE. ANY IDEA FOR INSTANCE THAT THE HARD CORE OF CONVICTS LEFT OVER FROM 1967 IS NEGOTIABLE WOULD CREATE A SITUATION WHICH MUST BE AVOIDED AT ALMOST ANY COST.

5. AN INCIDENT OCCURRED AFTER THE RECENT TRICKLE OF RELEASES HAD DRIED UP WHICH I THINK WELL ILLUSTRATES THE SITUATION. A DETAINEE HAD BEEN RELEASED IN JANUARY AND WAS PLACED UNDER SUPERVISION FOR 3 MONTHS, DURING WHICH TIME HE FAILED TO REPORT TO THE POLICE, SOME SIX AND A HALF MONTHS AFTER THE SUPERVISION ORDER HAD EXPIRED HE WAS NOTICED BY AN ALERT POLICEMAN AND ARRESTED. WE THEN FOUND

SECRET

THAT THE

↓

RET

HONG KONG TELEGRAM NO. 869 TO FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE

AT THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO YOU AT THE END OF PARAGRAPH 4 OF OUR TELEGRAM 14 OF 21 JANUARY WAS INCORRECT, AND IN FACT PROCEEDINGS. COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN AGAINST HIM DESPITE THE LAPSE OF SIX MONTHS SINCE THE OFFENCE WAS INDICTABLE, AS IT HAD BEEN APPARENTLY NEITHER OUR INTENTION HOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT BREACHES OF SUPERVISION ORDERS SHOULD BE PROSECUTED AFTER THEY HAD EXPIRED, AND AS IT IS UNDESIRABLE TO BE FACED WITH HAVING TO PROSECUTE DETAINEES WHO HAVE FAILED TO REPORT UNDER SUPERVISION ORDERS FOR YEARS TO COME, THE DECISION WAS TAKEN NOT TO PROSECUTE. BUT THE DECISION WAS A DIFFICULT ONE TO TAKE, IN THAT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN REPRESENTED AS BEING IN RESPONSE TO THE RELEASES OF THOSE PREVIOUSLY DETAINED BY THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. (IN THE EVENT I HAVE NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE

TWO EVENTS WERE CONNECTED BY ANYONE, THERE HAS BEEN NO PUBLICITY OF ANY KIND AND I BELIEVE NO HARM TO HAVE BEEN DONE).

6. I WAS RELIEVED TO SEE FROM YOUR TELEGRAM HUMBER AMP TO PEKING THAT MA HAD MADE NO MENTION OF HONG KONG IN DISCUSSING THE REMAINING

BRITISH SUBJECTS HELD. I HOPE WE CAN KEEP IT TRAT WAY.

7. I WOULD BE GRATEFUL IF YOU WOULD PASS A COPY OF THIS TELEGRAM

TO SIR DAVID TRENCH.

FCO PASS PRIORITY TO PEKING.

SIR H NORMAN WALKER.

[REPEATED AS REQUESTED]

288

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

F.E.D.

CONSULAR DEPT

HONG KONG DEPT.

I.P.D.

I.R.D.

NEWS DEPT.

SFFFF

SECRE ?

FER 14/1

RC Samuel Esq PHING

CONFIDENTIAL

25 August 1971

108

Despatch

25/8

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

1. In John Denson's telegram No 634 of 12 July he agreed that it would be useful to make a further communication to the Chinese in September about releases of confrontation prisoners to follow up the letter to Mr Chang Wen--ohin on 15 July. As you know another 5 are due for release before the end of the year; the first on 13 September. Would you please, unless Arthur Maddocks sees objection, send a similar letter on or about

10 September.

We have not mentioned this subject to the Chinese here of late and do not intend doing so unless they raise it.

The names and release dates were given in Hong Kong telegram No 472 of 10 July.

Copy to:

▲ ↑ Maddooks Esq FOG IO

CONFIDENTIAL

J A L Morgan

Far Eastern Department

26%

Mr Halford

CONFIDENTIAL

RECEIVED IN

REGISTRY No.50

25 AUG 1971

FEH 14/1

107

104

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS IN HONG KONG

The following is the present position. There are

now 29 confrontation prisoners left. Of these, 6 will be

released by the end of the year, including the remaining 5 of

the 13 whose sentences were reduced by the Board of Review at

its last meeting in June. Six of the 13 were released in

July and 2 in mid-August.

2. At the end of the year 23 will remain.

None of these

are due for release in 1972, 11 are due in 1973, 7 in 1974,

1 in 1975 and 2 in 1976. The 2 others have life sentences.

3. The Governor made clear in his telegram No 471 of 10 July

that he regards the Board of Review's last recommendations as

the end of the road. The remaining 23 are mainly convicted

of acts of violence.

4. On your instructions Hong Kong Department prepared a

submission during your leave. It was approved by Mr Royle.

The submission recommended that the Governor should be asked

to arrange for the Board of Review to take certain considerations

into account at its next meeting in September with a view to

bringing as many releases as possible forward into 1972. It

also recommended that the whole question be discussed with

Sir Murray MacLehose during his briefing in September.

5. Mr Laird accordingly wrote to Sir Hugh Norman-Walker on

10 August setting out the considerations which Mr Royle had

CONFIDENTIAL

- 1 +

CONFIDENTIAL

agreed should be put to the Board of Review. I attach

a copy of this letter. No reply has yet been received.

6. It was earlier agreed that we should inform the Chinese

in September of the 5 releases planned for September, October

and November. The first of these 5 comes out on 13 September.

I propose therefore to instruct Mr Denson to send a letter

to the MFA on about 10 September

19 August 1971

Jagree

SALMugan

J A L Morgan

Far Eastern Department

Mr.24€

CONFIDENTIAL

- 2 ·

CONFIDENTIAL

KEL 14/1

15 July 1971

Mr changer-in

Director

Lest Lurope a £ perican Department

Ministry of Foreign · ffairs

Feople's Republic of China

You will with to be more that, sa a result of a further

macting of the .rier board of Review in Hong Kong, é maber of reductions in the centences of priamnezu sentenced in 1967 bɩve beez věže, The result of these decisiuze will be that 6 prisurers will be retained ca duly 16, viure earliest relesse ¿. Wer veuld have teon 12 May 1978, 20 Sentraler 1972,

d. 20 Deconter 1972, € January 1973, 6 January 1273,

2 ay 1973. In recition, a further 2 prikoosis will be relo:zod on 12 and 13 august s 0

would otherwire have been 12 Decasue: 1775, mad V Teaber 1973. The process of review of sentences the frien

Board of Review will evntinue, sy will notesi relevant

I t ke this opportunity to conve, my cout win vs.

Сору

вроде

Das fr 1378

Blind copies to:

A F Maddocks,

Hong Kong

JAL Morgan,üsq P

Ja Jensen

C. NFIDENTIAL

Тов

*** 11/1

CONFIDE TIAL

Hong Kong Department

912 Hugh Norman-Walker KONG 'OBE

Splo:ial Secretýry 1500 KONG

10 August 1971

1. In the absence of Xiannel "ilford on leave I am writing to tell you that re have been trying to work out the position of the 23 confrontation priazzers who will still be on our hande at the end of the year (your telegram No. 471 of 10/87 July).

According to the courða we have here, none of these wine .org will be due for release in 1972, 11 will be due for

1.3. in 1973, 7 in 1974, 1 in 1975 and 2 in 1976. The oiler 2 have life er stenges.

3. In view of the strudy and etion over the last 18 months or ac ta tha

de t.

all or seisoners (from about 135 in November 1952 to 31 at the and of last month) ve have been "ondering

mutner there is anyti..., elas ve can do to increase the id:olihood of at least some releases during 1972. For instance, ip seome that after the end of the your there will be only 1 and of consecutive sont-nces Lo (or Law) Lan,

•

rison number

32869. Gould his cant be reviewại by the Board? Incidentally, in the detulled list of prisoners (showing offences, sentences un other details) sent to us in 1968 the sentences of Law Lun are given as 4 years and & gears with 14 March 1976 as the sculinst dute of airchɛrge (the sets of sentencs ir shown as "29.3.68 as from 15.3.62") unersaz in a Pent list honded

Com rontation prisoners held in 26 February, 1971," the Buntence of Lo Lun (number 28 on the list) is given as 4 + 5 consecutive with 28 March 1976 as the expected date of discharge.

Another possible line of auprouch might be to review the entences of prisoners with clean records before 1967. IS there any evidence that those alreɛdy releared lave made zuisances of themselves?

#115,

3. bi

Finally, 2ɔ uzsume that it would be in accordance with noonal practice to mat ɛ term to the 2 life uentences and also to consider the use of parole.

CONFIDENTIAL

/6.

CONFIDENTIAL

It was the discovery that in the normal course of events none of the 23 prisoners at the end of the year would be due for release until 1973 at the earliest that led us to look into this. We do not know whether the considerations to which I have referred have :lready been taken into account by the Board of Ngview; but if they haven't would it be possible to arrange for this to be done at the meeting of the Board fixed for next month? Peringa in this way a number of the 1973/74 releases could be brought into 1972 together with the prisoner with ecnsecutive santa..ces due for release in 19767

F C Laird

[ Capy to: J.B. Dearch Esq. 8.B.E.

PELING I.

1918€

CONFINERTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

Nr DX Scott

D/Scott

Sir S Tomlins

Kr Løgen

rohm way 2/8 Approved

Sinc.okom

lisch

COMMUNIST FRISONERS IN HONG KONG

HR.

On 31 December 1971, we shall be left with 23 "confrontation

Of these 23, none is due

prisoners" (2 with life sentences).

for release in 1972, 11 are due for release in 1973, 7 in

1974, 1 in 1975 and 2 in 1976.

We have a detailed list of confrontation prisoners

arranged by month of release. This was prepared in 1968

and shows offences, sentences and other details. It is not

possible however to establish from this list the criteria used

by the Board of Review when considering reductions in sentence.

ATTITUDE OF THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT

3. The Chinese have not recently made formal representations

to us about the prisoners though Kr Chou Enlai expressed the

hope when he spoke to Mr Denson last March that they would all

be released by the time Sir D Trench's term as Governor came

to an end (mid October 1971). This was repeated to Mr Wilford

by Ur Pei in June. A month later Kr Denson was reminded

(but in a very low key) that the Chinese continued to be

concerned about the prisoners still remaining.

We do not believe that the Chinese Government will be

seriously worried provided the steady progress of the last

18 months or so is maintained. (At the time of Mr Grey's

release in November 1969 there were 135 confrontation prisoners;

COFIDENTIAL

/by

CONFIDENTIA.

They

by September 1970 the figure had dropped to 80 and by February 1971 to 49; in December 1971 it will be 23).

might however turn the screw by reminding us what Chou said

at some stage in our negotiations for our exchange of

Ambassadors.

EFFECT OF RELEASES IN HONG KONG

5. So far there has been no attempt by the Chinese to stir

Indeed they seem to have gone

up troubid over

LHC IQIcases.

out of their way to help to keep the temperature down. There has been very little public interest in the Colony. Quite a few influential Hong Kong people have told us that

they supported the course which the Governor, at our

The Governor has however

encouragement, had been pursuing. tended to over-estimate the effect of the releases, (arguing for example in January 1971 "that any wholesale (releases)

would res (AAM

On balance it would appear that the releases could be continued at about the present pace or even accelerated

without causing any serious trouble in Hong Kong.

THE POSITION IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

7. In recent months this question has attracted very little attention in the United Kingdom. It seems likely that opinion in general would welcome cautious progress in the

matter on the grounds that it would help to improve relations

generally with China.

COURSES OF ACTION

(a) Under the authrбity vested in him by the Letters

Patent, the Governor could order the release of all

or some of the 23. In favour of this it can be

said that

2. CONFIDENTIAL

/(1)

CONFIDENTIAL

(1) The Communists are doing everything possible

to avoid trouble with the authorities in Hong

Kong.

(ii) The prisoners were incited by outside events in

1967 (the situation is very different today).

(iii) The Governor's departure would be an appropriate

moment for a gesture the end of an era.

(b) Alternatively the Governor could order remission of

sentences bringing forward all or some of the dates

of release.

to the Board of Review -

(1) The one case of consecutive sentences should be

reviewed (the sentences of all other prisoners

convicted of more than one offence run

concurrently).

(li) The sentences of prisoners with clean records

before 1967 should be reviewed. In the present

state of trouble-free relations between Hong Kong

and China if such prisoners were let out now or

in the near future it seems most unlikely that they would cause trouble. (Is there any evidence

that those already released have made nuisances

of themselves?)

(iii) A term should be set to life sentences.

(iv) The use of parole should be considered.

CONFIDENTIAL

/(a)

CON'IDEMIAL

(a) Mr Denson has recently suggested that in the case

of the real hard core we could tell the Chinese

frankly that in view of the nature of the offences

of those still imprisoned (which we would need to

specify in detail) we could see no prospect of their

early release. If the Chinese were genuinely

worried about them for humanitarian reasons we

should be happy to "release them to China".

This

proposal has been completely unacceptable to the

Chinese in the past but it is just possible that

they might consider it now that relations have

improved.

RECOLIENDATION

It is desirable to put an end to this problem in 1972 or

at least to break the back of it in that year (a copy of

Mr Wilford's submission of 22 September, 1970, is attached). Kr

10. The Board of Review are expected to meet again in September.

I recommend that the Governor be asked to arrange for the

Board to take into account the considerations set out in paragraph 8(c) above with a view to bringing all or most of

the 1973/74 releases into 1972. The prisoner with

consecutive sentences due for release in 1976 might also be

brought into 1972.

11.

I also recommend that the whole question be discussed

with Sir Murray MacLehose when he returns to the FCO for

briefing in September.

/12.

CONFIDENTIAL

12.

This submission is based on an outline prepared by

Mr Wilford before he went on leave.

cleared with Far Eastern Department.

Ite terms have been

Eraina

Па

E O Laird

Hong Kong Department

30 July 1971

Sir L Monson (or)

Mr Wilford (or)

Mr Crowson FED

I suffert recomanatin

адм

face

Любит 2/8

agree with this recommodations

Postombicon

CONFIDENTIAL

3/0

CONFIDENTIAL

COMPRONTATION PRISONERS HELD ON 1 AUGUST 1971

Prison No.

Sentence

(years}

Expected date of discharYE

25.1.73

CHAN Chin-fong

28330

GAI GỌI

28491

5+8+8+2 concurrent

8+8 concurrent (revised to 6)

18.10.71

CHAN HOR

28490

8+2 concurrent (revised to 6)

16.10.71

CHAN Sang-cheung

29863

15.8.74

CHAN Ving-cheung

28016

8+8 concurrent (revised to 6)

13.9.71

CHAN Yik

CHAN Yak-va

叫小

28489

8+4 concurrent

3.2.73

28754

10×10 concurrent

4.7.74

CHAU Sik-keung

27496

8+8+4+8 concurrent (revised to 6)

12.8.71

CHENG Yat-choi

28669

17.3.73

10.

CHỦ Vằng chun

28998

Life

11.

IP sing

29884

9+9+5+9+9_concurrent

12.

IP Tat-sking

28999

10+5+Life+Life concurrent

13.

IP Yuen-kwan

28492

(revised to 6)

14.

LAI KVORJ

28329

5+8 concurrent

15.

LEUNG PUL

30412

5+5+8+5 concurrent

16.

LO LU

32869

4+5 consecutive

17.

LO Shui-yan

30954

12+12+12 concurrent

11.1.74

4.10.71

25.1.73

9.6.73

28.3.76

15.2.76

18.

LUX Nam

29279

6.4.73

19.

MOE Siu-kui

29736

14.12.75

20.

SZETO Poon

29281

7.4.73

CONFIDENTIAL

103

Prison No.

CONFIDENTIAL

Sentence

Expected date of discharge

24.6.74

21.

TAM Pat (alias VONG Yau)

28707

10+5 concUSTER?

22.

TO Min

28906

16.3.73

23.

Tổ 3 chủng-play

27993

5+8 concurTORT

10.1.73

24.

TSANG Pal-ming

27495

B+8+4+9 comeurrent (revised to 6)

13.8.71

25.

TSANG Hai

28834

16.11.73

26.

TSUI Chun

29682

27.

VAN Can-kung

28168

28.

VAN Kei

28968

9 (revised to 6)

29.

WONG chung

29282

30.

WONG Ting-sau

28328

31.

YAU Vai

29883

9+9+5+9+9

10+10+5 ce

6+5 concurrent

5+8+8 conGUITAR T

9+9+5+5 concurrent

11.1.74

21.11.71.

6.12.71

25.1.73

25.1.74

28.7.71.

CONFIDENTIAL

CS. 41A

2600077

15,000-4/71-32648)

REF.

SCR 6/2621/67 III

CONFIDENTIAL

Covering

SECRET

سكت

pp pz.

COLONIAL SECRETARIAT

LOWER ALBERT ROAD

HONG KONG

20 July, 1971.

Yoz

JAL Morgan Esq FED

F CO

Dear John,

1967 WANTED PERSONS

FEA

I am not sure whether you are avare that we have had 33 warrants outstanding for the arrest of persons wanted in connection with serious offences during the 1967 confrontation. I think our last reference was in paragraph 3 of our telegram No. 869 to FCO of 14 November, 1969, shortly after we revieved the matter. As stated in that telegram, our policy has been not to search for these wanted persons but if they happen to be recognised in a public place by a police officer he would arrest the individual in the ordinary course of his duties. arrest has occurred in recent years.

No such

We have recently reviewed the problem. Sir David Trench has decided that three names should be kept on the list and the remainder should be deleted. I enclose details about the three vho vill be kept on the list. You will see that the first two are wanted for very serious offences. The Attorney General thought and the Governor agreed that it would not be right to cancel the warrants for their arrest. But the same general policy will apply, i.e. we shall not seek them out. The third one is different. to be caned but did not turn up for his punishment. the other two he is believed to be in China.

He was sentenced

289/

HKK 1/2

We considered whether to keep on the list a certain HỌ Ki who lives at Sha Tau Kok and, in addition to 1967 offences (riot and unlawful assembly) has often been involved in stone throwing attacks on police/military patrols there since then. We decided to delete his name but to accept that the police might arrest him for one of his post-1967 stone throwing attacks. If they did, they would not prosecute him for his 1967 offences.

We shall of course not be giving any publicity to these decisions. There seems to be no advantage in mentioning it in any way to the Chinese since their reaction would be to complain that we had retained any names on the list of vanted

men.

/Contd.

CONFIDENTIAL COVERING SECRET

CONFIDENTIAL

Covering

SECRET

I might also mention that a reward is still offered for information about the murderer(s) of LAM Bun, the radio announcer who was burned to death in his car by communist thugs in 1967.

ever

You

Arthur

(A F Maddocks)

cc.

(with enclosure)

J B Denson Esq OBE (PEXING)

CONFIDENTIAL

Serial No.

Name

Age

SECRET

Occupation or Status

Offence

HO Shu-cheung

Earth Worker

(0149/2885/4382)

WONG Chak

Earth Worker

(7806/1341)

IP Siu-ki

(5509/0340/3825)

Probability of Arrest

Murder of PC 3810 on 9 December, 1967 at Kam Tin,

N.T.

Believed to be in China. No immediate prospect of arrest.

Robbery with Aggravation on 6 November, 1967 at Yuen Long, N.T.

Believed to be in China. No immediate prospect of arrest.

Possession of Imflammatory

Posters

SECRET

Present whereabouts

unknown. No immediate

prospect of arrest.

FRIORITY

CYPHER CAT/A

FM HONGXONG 233443Z

CONFIDENTIAL,

CONFIDENTIAL

RECEIVED IN

REGISTRY No.50

TO PRIORITY F.C.O. TELEGRAM NÓ.497-00723RD JULY PRIOPITY

GENEVA,

INFO TO CONSUL GENERAL CCHEVA, CHARGE

AFFAIRES PEKING

AND HONG KONG GOVERMENT OFFICE LONDON.

GENEVA TELEGRAMS HOS. 17 AND 19 TO YOU: CONFRONTATION

PRISONERS ·

I STILL THINK IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEĽ OF THE RED CROSS TO USE THE EXPRESSION ''POLITICAL

DETAINEE'* WHICH HAS OBJECTIONABLE IMPLICATIONS ELSEWHERE

HOWEVER HARMLESS IT MAY BE IN GENEVA, AND WHICH CAN THUS BE

EXPLOITED BY THE PRESS TO TRY AND CAUSE EMBARRASSHENT, AS ON

THIS OCCASION. I HOPE THAT YOU WILL CONSIDER IT POSSIBLE TO

MAKE FURTHER REPRESENTATIONS TO THEM. I REALISE THAT THEY

ARE PREPARED TO PUBLICISE AGAIN THEIR 1969 DEFINITION OF THE PHRASE, PUT THIS WILL NOT DE WHOLLY SATISFACTORY SINCE THE

DEFINITION IS LIKELY TO BE GEHERALLY FORGOTTEN AGAIN! (OR OVERLOOKED EVEN PERHAPS DELIBERATELY) WHENEVER IT IS USED IN THE FUTURE,

F C O PLEASE PASS TO ALL

TRENCH

FILES

FED

READ

CONSULAR DET

MR WILFORD

SIR L MONSON

FFFFF

[REPEATED AS REQUESTED]

COPIES TO

CONFIDENTIAL

101

HONG KONG GOVERNMENT OFFICE

Crawenda

27/7

Lower discussed

Me Gaminers 1 H

with

agrem

Can

2917

sme no.

rel

2-717-

CONFIDENTIAL

CYPHER CAT A

RECEIVED IN

For COPY

FM PEKING 2028357

R.G. IN- 50

21 JUL 1971

CONFIDENTIAL

FEAT

TO ROUTINE FCO TELNO 669/OF 29 JULY INEQ HONG KÔNG.

Ex ixli

YOUR TELNO 589 TO HONG KONG : CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

100

1. AFTER MY MEETING WITH CHIAO KUAN-HUA YESTERDAY (MY TELNO 667)

I WAS TAKEN ASIDE BY LING CH'ING, A QUOTE RESPONSIBLE PERSON UNQUOTE

OF THE EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN DEPARTMENT, WHO SAID HE WOULD LIKE TO

HAVE A WORD ABOUT CONFRONTATION PRISONERS. HE CONFIRMED THAT THE

106) CHINESE HAD RECEIVED MY LETTER (OF 15 JULY) INFORMING THEM OF THE

FORTHCOMING RELEASES. THE CHINESE SIDE HAD NOTED THEM WITH

SATISFACTION BUT CONTINUED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRISONERS STILL

REMAINING.

1 SAID THAT THE REVIEW PROCEDURE WOULD CONTINUE BUT WAS NOT IN A

POSITION TO SAY ANYTHING MORE ON THE MATTER. THE CHINESE GOVERN-

MENT'S ATTITUDE WAS WELL UNDERSTOOD IN LONDON. THE EXCHANGE WAS

CONDUCTED IN A VERY LOW KEY.

DENSON

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

FOD iKD

FFFFF

CONFIDENTIAL

4282217

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS FOR EARLY RELEASE

(Hong Kong telegrams Nos. 471 and 472 of 10 July to FC 0)

Name

Prison No.

Sentence by Court (years)

Original date of release

Revised sentence recommended by Board of Review

Nev date of release

MA Shu-keung

27994

12.5.72.

5 years

16.7.71.

YIM Kun-sau

30198

25.9.72.

5 years

16.7.71.

LING Suet-keung

27684

20.12.72.

5 years

16.7.71.

FUNG Moon

27952

6.1.73.

5 years

16.7.71.

ம்

So Pun

27953

6.1.73.

5 years

16.7.71.

NG Kin-piu

29702.

2.5.73.

5 years

16.7.71.

CHAU Sik-keung

27496

12.12.72.

6 years

12.8.71.

TSANG Fai-ming

27495

13.8.73.

6 years

13.8.71.

CHAN Wing-cheung

28016

13.1.73.

6 years

13.9.71.

10.

IP Yuen-kvan

28492

4.2.73.

6 years

4.10.71.

11.

CHAN Hon

28490

18.2.73.

6 years

18.10.71.

12.

CHAN Choi

28491

18.2.73.

6 years

18.10.71.

13.

WAN Ki

28968

21.11.73.

6 years

21.11.71.

13 July 1971

CONFIDENTIAL

CS. 41A

2600077

15,000-4/71-8643

REF.

CONFIDENTIAL

An Interenti

q.R.

account

N.B: Not for quotation our reference

K M Wilford Esq' CMG

AUS

FCO

He's

конк

Dear Michad,

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

Mo Hang das 1917

Mi Magen

ino stin

COLONIAL SECRETARIAT

LOWER ALBERT ROAD

HONG KONG

8 July, 1971.

Coyle

H.K. Dept.

McCray son

Anant (see 83->)

підац

En ish

The attitude drep

in this is not very helpful and is antibally,

to provide anyway

out for the future.

Your telegram No.475 of 1 July addressed to me arrived only on 3 July and, as is normal with telegrams here, was given a distribution which included the Governor, C S and others. I hope you were not too surprised to receive a brief reply from the Governor (his telegram No.452 of 3 July). was rather irritated to see a telegram on this subject addressed to me. He has quite a narrow view of the functions of the Political Adviser and on the subject of prisoners he is very conscious that he has a personal responsibility for signing the warrants of release. If you want to communicate with me privately, the only way is by letter. On this occasion no great harm was done. There is no advantage in saying any more to the Governor about it.

You may however like to have this private note about what has been going on over confrontation prisoners and why we have still not sent you a full account of the Board of Reviev's June meeting.

The Board met as planned on 17 June with Denys Roberts in the chair and had on its agenda 13 cases of confrontation prisoners plus some other cases of non-confrontation prisoners. By some magic which I do not understand Denys Roberts got the Board to recommend in favour of early release of all 13.

We would normally have discussed these recommendations the next day, 18 June, but that turned out to be a typhoon day. We had no meetings and little government business. There was in any case no urgency since the first prisoners to be released vere planned to come out only in July. Sir Hugh Norman-Walker also Felt it would be advisable to make no announcement until Sir David Trench returned to avoid any possible suggestion that Sir David and Sir Hugh thought differently about prisoners (they do not).

We accordingly discussed the recommendations at Government House on Friday, 25 June. The CP expressed some grave doubts about releasing the 13, arguing that they were very bad types who had been involved in violent activities, bombing etc. They were in fact men whom he had himself confronted and

CONFIDENTIAL

/contd....

x2217

CONFIDENTIAL

had to deal with in Kowloon in 1967. Sir Hugh told him that he would need to make a very good case indeed if the Board of Review's recommendations were not to be accepted and gave him time to examine the cases individually and to set out his views.

It was only on 6 July that the C P's views were made known to us and even then they were communicated orally and by D S to me. He accepted six of the proposals but argued in favour of not releasing the other seven. do not know why it took so long. The Police are certainly short staffed and hard pressed at the top levels. They do seem to have become slower to give views on policy matters in the last few months. I think the main difficulty must have been that Charles Sutcliffe found it impossible to identify facts or arguments which had not been equally obvious and available to the Board of Review.

At the moment of writing we are still waiting for the Governor's decision. I hope that by the time you receive this letter you will have had a full and satisfactory telegram on the subject.

I am keeping this letter on my private file. Please do not refer to it in any official correspondence.

Your ever.

Ather

(A F Maddocks)

CC.

J B Denson Esq ÜBE Peking.

CONFIDENTIAL

ז - 1 - ח

PRIORITY

CYPHER/CAT A

CONFIDENTIAL

YOP QUI:

FM CONSUL GENERAL GENEVA 161605Z

CONFIDENTIAL

TO PRIORITY FCO TEL NO 18 OF 16 JULY 1971

INFO PRIORITY GOVERNOR HONG KONG AND PEKING.

HONG KONG CONFRONTATION PRISONERS,

MIPT: HONG KONG

FOLLOWING IS TEXT OF MESSAGE OF 13 JULY FROM ICRC DELEGATE WEIBEL IN HONG KONG TO ICRC GENEVA

BEGINS:

REFERENCE INFORMATION NOTES NO 158 OF MARCH 10, 1971. IN REPORT ON VISIT TO STANLEY PRISON ABOVE PUBLICATION NENTIONS 66 POLITICAL DETAINEES STOP LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS TERMINOLOGY WHICH IMPLIES DETAINEES HAVE NOT HAD TRIALS STOP ALL 66 APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN CONVICTED AS A RESULT OF THEIR PARTICIPATION IN 1967 DISTURBANCES AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE CALLED DETAINEES OR PRISONERS STOP PLEASE AUTHORIZE ME BY RETURN TELEX TO MAKE THIS CLARIFICATION TO THE PRESS WHICH IS ABOUT TO PUBLISH YOUR ABOVE REPORT STOP

BEGINS.

FOLLOWING IS TEXT OF ICRC REPLY OF 14 JULY TO WEIBEL:

THANKS YOUR TELEX 13.7 ICRC INFORMATION NOTES NO 158 AND 159. WE AUTHORIZE CLARIFICATION AND SUGGEST AFTER POLITICAL DETAINEES ADDITION FOLLOWING WORDS QUOTE WHO WERE SENTENCED TO PRISON TERMS FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN 1967 EVENTS UNQUOTE PLEASE SEE ICRC POSITION ON THIS TERMINOLOGY IN 1969 ICRC ANNUAL REPORT ENGLISH EDITION PAGE 21 FOOTHOTE STOP WE SUGGEST YOU MENTION THIS FOOTNOTE TO AUTHORITIES TESTUZ INTERCPOIXROUGE ENDS.

CONFIDENTIAL /3. ICRO INFORMATION

CONFIDENTIAL

ICRC

ICRC INFORMATION NOTES NO 159 OF 31 MARCH (REPRODUCED SUMMARILY IN THE APRIL INTERNATIONAL REVIEW) READS AS FOLLOWS:- BEGINS. HONG KONG. PRISON VISIT. THE ICRC DELEGATE IN HONG KONG CONTINUED HIS MISSION TO PLACES OF DETENTION (SEE THE '' IN ACTION ** NO 158 OF 10 MARCH, 1971). ON 18 FEBRUARY, 1971 HE WENT TO THE TAI LAM PRISON FOR WOMEN WHERE HE SAW FIVE POLITICAL DETAINEES. AS CUSTOMARY, THE ICRC REPORT WILL BE SENT TO THE DETAINING POWER. ENDS.

EVANS

FILES

YED

HKD

CONS D

NR WILFORD

SIR L MONSON

-2-

CONFIDENTIAL

COPIES TO

H K GOVT OFFICE

PRIORITY

CYPHER/CAT A

196

CONFIDENTIAL

"AP COPY

FM CONSUL GENERAL GENEVA 1616002

CONFIDENTIAL

TO PRIORITY FCO TEL NO 17 OF 16

JULY

INFO PRIORITY GOVERNOR HONG KONG, INFO PRIORITY PEKING

YOUR. TEL NO 519 TO HONG KONG,

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

AS RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL RED CROSS MATTERS RESTS WITH THE CONSULATE-GENERAL AT GENEVA AND NOT WITH THE UNITED KINGDOM MISSION I HAVE ACTED ACCORDINGLY ON YOUR PARAGRAPH 3.

2. I DISCUSSED THE MATTER TODAY WITH TESTUZ

THE I C R C DELEGATE FOR THE FAR EAST. HE SHOWED ME THE EXCHANGE OF TELEGRAMS BETWEEN WEIBEL (HONORARY ICR C DELEGATE FOR HONG KONG) AND HIMSELF. TEXTS ARE IN MY IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING TELEGRAM.

3. THE FOOTNOTE ON PAGE 21 OF THE ENGLISH EDITION OF THE 1969 ICRC ANNUAL REPORT READS AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINS. FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY, THE EXPRESSION QUOTE POLITICAL DETAINEE UNQUOTE IN THIS REPORT COVERS NOT ONLY PERSONS SENTENCED OR DETAINED FOR THEIR POLITICAL IDEAS BUT ALSO FOR OFFENCES WITH POLITICAL OR IDEOLOGICAL

MOTIVES.

ENDS.

4. TESTUZ SAID THAT IT WAS ESSENTIALLY A QUESTION OF ICRC LANGUAGE AND PARTICULAR TERMINOLOGY IN USE SINCE 1969 WHICH HAD A WIDE MEANING. SO FAR AS I CRC KERE CONCERNED THIS TERM EMBRACED COMMON LAW PRISONERS WHO HAD BEEN DULY TRIED AND SENTENCED FOR CRIMES COMMITTED FOR POLITICAL MOTIVES. THEY WERE VERY WILLING TO EXPLAIN THE WIDER DEFINITION TO ANYONE BY WHOM IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN

OR BE MISUNDERSTOOD OR INTEFPRETED. /5. I POINTED OUT

CONFIDENTIAL

5. I POINTED OUT THAT SOME WIDER PUBLICITY MIGHT BE INDICATED SINCE THE ICRC ANNUAL REPORT DID NOT HAVE AS WIDE A CIRCULATION AS OTHER I CRC PUBLICATIONS. TESTUZ AGREED AND SAID THEY WOULD TAKE AN EARLY OPPORTUNITY TO REPUBLISH THE DEFINITION, WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ANY PARTICULAR

COUNTRY, IN A FORTHCOMING ISSUE OF ICRC INFORMATION NOTES AND THE MONTHLY INTERNATIONAL REVIEW.

6. ALL THE PUBLICATIONS UNDER REFERENCE WERE SENT TO THE CONSULAR DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME THEY WERE ISSUED.

EVANS

FILES

FED

HKD

CONS D

MR WILFORD

SIR L MONSON

COPIES TO

H K GOVT OFFICE

-2-

CONFIDENTIAL

1/2

CONFIDENTIAL

OFFICE OF THE

BRITISH CHARGE D'A. FAIRES

PEKING

12 July 1971

H.K. Dat

B.J. HYS.

198

197

J AL Morgan Esq

Far Eastern Department

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SW1

Bear John,

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

19.8

789

You will have seen my telegram number 634 agreeing with the Governor's proposal in Hong Kong telegram number 471 to the FCC, that we should adopt a two-bite procedure in informing the Chinese about the release of the latest batch of 13 confrontation prisoners.

After the second communication has been made in September, the Chinese may well press for information about the remaining 23 prisoners and revert to their previous suggestion that they should all be released before the Governor of Hong Kong ends his term. Since it is clear that we have got down to the real hard core, it is for consideration whether at some stage after September we should not tell the Chinese frankly that in view of the nature of the offences of those still imprisoned, which we would need to specify in detail, we can see no prospect of their early release. If the Chinese were genuinely worried about thez. for humanitarian reasons we should be happy to "release them to China",

I know that this proposal has been completely unacceptable to the Chinese in the past but I think that it is just possible that they might consider it now that relations have improved. In any case having made the proposal we shall be in a better position to answer any further represent-tions which they might make.

Clearly we should not wish to say anything about this to the Chinese while the cuestion of an Exchange of ambasadors remcins unsettled. It might indeed be something which the new .mbassador could raise after he arrives. He and you will no doubt wish to consider it further in consult tion with the new Governor of Hong Kong.

Jous Joi

JB Denson

cc AF Maddocks Esq

ront Kong

CONFIDENTIAL

(IIK)

(94.

CONFIDENTIAL

PRIORITY CYPHER/CAT A

TOP COPY

FM FCO 151030Z

CONFIDENTIAL

TO PRIORITY GOVERNOR HONG KONG TELEGRAM NUMBER 519 OF 15 JULY INFO PEKING UK MISSION GENEVA.

YOUR TELEGRAM NO.478.

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

FEA

14/1

WE AGREE WITH YOUR PARAGRAPH 5 BUT SUGGEST THAT LAST SENTENCE SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS:

QUOTE WHEN THE DELEGATE OF THE 1.C.R.C. VISITED STANLEY PRISON ON 4 FEBRUARY, 1971, THERE WERE 1,740 PRISONERS SERVING SENTENCES THERE ALL OF WHOM HAD BEEN TRIED AND CONVICTED IN THE COURTS. OF THESE 67 HAD BEEN CONVICTED OF OFFENCES COMMITTED DURING THE 1967 DISTURBANCES.

UNQUOTE

2. AS IT STAND THE SENTENCE MIGHT BE READ AS MEANING THAT ONLY 67 OF THE PRISONERS HAD BEEN TRIED BY THE COURTS,

3. WE ARE ASKING UKMIS GENEVA, IN THIS TELEGRAM, TO TAKE PARALLEL ACTION WITH 1.C.R.C. TO REINFORCE REPRESENTATIONS REFERRED TO IN YOUR PARAGRAPH 6.

DOUGLAS-HOME

FILES:

COPIES TO:

HKD

FED

MR WILFORD

SIR L MONSON

CONFIDENTIAL

H.K.GOVT.OFFICE

Registry No.

DEPARTMENT

Hong Kon

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION PRIORITY MARKINGS

Date and time (G.M.T.) telegram should

reach addressee(s)

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

(Date)

ALI----------~OOL YELLO

.......

Top Secret

Confidential

Reserfaced

Unclassified

PRIVACY MARKING

Gove

In Confidence

En Clair. Code

Cypher

Draft Telegram to:- No. 519 Ronny

(Date)

And to:-

1517

Flastr Ammediate

Priority

}

CYPHER

CONFIDENTIAL 151030 Z

Security classification"

if any

[ Privacy marking

-if any

[Codeword-if any)

Addressed to

telegram No....

And to

.LL

Garonor, Hang

repeated for information to

-11---------------

...(date)

------- PINS

Peking UK. Minion Geneva.

21---~~---------I'LL

---||

זזז!!

ו...

2 - - ■'` --` -|

IMINNALLANI |

Repeat to:

toit

Saving to......

Your telegem No. 478.

The minis opereres. Confrontation Presoners

U..K.

with

a gree

your paragraph

Saving to:-

Distribution:-

Files

Copies to:-

F HKD.

* FED

Sith. Monsin.

گیاکہ می

suggest that last sentence should read as follows:

When the delegate of the I.C.R.C. visited Stanley Prisons on

1971

4 February,

there were 1,740 prisoners

strong sentences there all of whom whad brew tired and convicted in

been

the counts. Of these 67 had been Convicted of offences committed during the 1967 disturbances.

stands the sentence might

Mr Wilford. 2. As it stands Hong Kong Good 1030/15/22 office. i read as meaning that only 67 of the

Wish

JULI

LII

prismiss

prisoners had been tried by the

courts.

3. We are asking UK MIS Geneva, in

this telegram, to take parallel

FL NFORCE лесбия

action with ICRC, to very sore

representations referred to his your

paragraph 6.

ANB

(1088) ELORZ0059154m) (77orts) 1/68[C.W.8.£.s£Gp.96]

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

CONFIDENTIAL

PRIORITY

CYPHER CAT/A

F" HONGKONG 140745Z

CONFIDENTIAL

RECE

FEAT

TO PRIORITY F.C.O. TELEGRAM NO.478 OF 14TH JULY

COT

PRIORITY INFO CHARGE D AFFAIRES PEKING, HONGKONG GOVERNMENT OFFICE LONDON AND U.K. MISSION GENEVA (F C O PLEASE PASS TO ALL)

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS PUBLISH FOR PRESS USE INFORMATION NOTES CALLED QUOTE THE ICRC IN ACTION UNQUOTE.

2. A COPY OF ISSUE NUMBER 1588 DATED 10TH MARCH HAS APPARENTLY JUST REACHED THE HONGKONG STANDARD HERE. IT CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING PASSAGE QUOTE ON 4TH FEBRUARY 1971 THE

DELEGATE OF THE ICRC VISITED STANLEY PRISON HONG KONG. HE

SAW THERE 66 POLITICAL DETAINEES UNQUOTE.

3. THE SAME WORDS APPEAR IN THE APRIL ISSUE OF THE INTER-

NATIONAL REVIEW OF THE RED CROSS.

4. THE THEN LOCAL HONORARY DELEGATE (MR H HEFTI) DID VISIT THE PRISON THAT DAY. HIS SUBSEQUENT REPORT WAS COPIED TO US.

AND CORRECTLY USED THE WORD *PRISONERS** THROUGHOUT.

5. WE HAVE BEEN ASKED FOR COMMENTS AND PROPOSE TO SAY:

QUOTE THIS REPORT IS VERY MISLEADING. THERE ARE NO POLITICAL

DETAINEES IN HONG KONG PRISONS. WHEN THE DELEGATE OF THE

ICRC VISITED STANLEY PRISON ON 4TH FEBRUARY 1971 THERE WERE 1,749 PRISONERS SERVING SENTENCES THERE, OF THESE 67 HAD BEEN TRIED BY THE COURTS AND CONVICTED OF OFFENCES COMMITTED DURING

THE 1967 DISTURBANCES UNQUOTE.

6. THIS STATEMENT HAS BEEN AGREED WITH THE PRESENT HONORARY DELEGATE (MR N.E, WEIBEL) WHO IS SEEKING AUTHORITY TO EXPLAIN THAT THE MISTAKE WAS AN ERROR IN TRANSLATION AND IS ASKING

/THE RED

CONFIDENTIAL

новости я ป 1

CONFIDENTIAL

MIGHT

THE RED CROSS TO BE CIRCUNSPECT IN FUTURE. ANY ACTION THAT

BE POSSIBLE TO RE-INFORCE HIS REPRESENTATIONS WOULD

BE APPRECIATED.

WE EXPECT THE HONG KONG STANDARD TO USE THIS MATERIAL

LATER IN THE WEEK.

TRENCH

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

BKD FED

-2- CONFIDENTIAL

IMMEDIATE

CYPHER CAT A

192

CONFIDENTIAL

(OP COPT

M PEKING 14/533Z

REGI

CONFIDENTIAL

[Cu2 1971

DESK BY 143920Z

TO IMMEDIATE FCO TELKO, 645 OF 14 JULY.

MY TELNC. 634:

COPFRONTATION PRISONERS.

1. TO ACHIEVE SOME EFFECT WITH THE CHINESE I SHOULD GET MY LETTER

TO THE MFA BY FIRST THING THURSDAY MORNING PEKING TIME AT THE LATEST.

GRATEFUL TO KNOW EY P180Z 15 JULY IF I MAY PROCEED.

DENSON

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

FED

HKD

PUSD

PCD

IRD

CONS D

GIPD

NEWS D

CONFIDENTIAL

Po 1617

THILDIARE

JPYER/CAT A

FN F.C.0. 131615Z

CONFIDENTIAL

(淋

TO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG TELEGRAM NO. 529 OF 13 JULY INFO PEKING.

YOUR TELEGRAM NO. 471: CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

1. WE AGREE WITH THE TIMING YOU SUGGEST AND THE ACTION DENSON PROPOSES TO TAKE (PARAGRAPH 2 OF PEKING TELEGRAM NO. 634).

2. WE DO NOT PROPOSE TO MAKE A SPECIAL POINT OF INFORMING THE CHINESE HERE BUT WILL LET THEM KNOW IF A SUITABLE OCCASION ARISES.

DOUGLAS-HOME

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

FED

JKD

NHAN

CONFIDENTIAL

<617

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

Registry No.

DEPARTMENT

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

JAIM

Top Secret

Plast

Secret

Confidential

Restricted

Unalteiled

PRIVACY MARKING

In Confidence

PRIORITY MARKINGS

Immediate Prority

• Date and time (G.M.T.) telegram should

(Date) -

Despatched

reach addressee(s)

13/7

2252

CYPHER

•Security_classification -if any

CONFIDENTIAL.

1-516152

HÙNG KON

...(date)

En Clair.

Code

Cyphe

Draft Telegram to:-

HONG/KONG No.

(Date)

ווייז

And to:-

[

Privacy marking -if any

[Codeword-if any]

Addressed to

telegram No..

CLJILLIANÇ---------‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒ ------ -----------

509. 13/7

And to

repeated for information to...

Saving to.....

ZKIN

Rebert to:-

PEKING

[3]

Saving to:-

Your telegram No 471:

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

1. We agree with the timing you suggest and the action

Denson proposes to take (paragraph 2 of Peking telegram

No 634).

We do not propose to make a special point of

informing the Chinese here but will let them know if a

suitable occasion arises.

Distribution:-

DEPARTMENTAL

FED HKD

16152

Bhhil

Copies to:-

Doll

1316202

CONFIDENTIAL

11/3

Flag

CONFIDENTIAL

Mr Wilford

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

RE VED IN

N-.50 4,50

14 JUL 1971

Бен EH 14/1

1. I should like to reply to Hong Kong telegram No 471

on the lines of the attached draft.

Hong Kong Department concur.

12 July 1971

SALM ugyan

J A L Morgan

Far Eastern Department

CONFIDENTIAL

(90)

PRIORITY

CYPHER CAT A

CONFIDENTIAL

* AMENDED COPY (13 JULY)

FI PEKING 1203102

CONFIDENTIAL

RECEIVED IN

REĢISTRYN.

14 JUL 1971

·TER

TO PRIORITY FCO TELNO, 634 OF 12 JULY INFO PRIORITY HONG KONG.

HONG KONG TELNO. 471:

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS

1. I SEE ADVANTAGE IN THE TIMETABLE PROPOSED IN PARAGRAPH 7 AS

IT VILL ENABLE US TO MAKE A FURTHER COMMUNICATION TO THE CHINESE

IN SEPTEMBER AND AVOID GIVING THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAVE COME TO

A FULL STOF, THIS IS THINKK DESIRABLE WHILE NEGOTIATIONS FOR AN

EXCHANGE OF AMBASSADORS ARE PROCEEDING.·

2. UNLESS YOU SEE OBJECTION I PROPOSE TO SEND A LETTER ON 14 JULY

TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE WESTERN EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN DEPARTMENT,

IFORNING HIN OF THE RELEASE OF THE FIRST EIGHT* PRISONERS.

DENSON

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

FID.

FUSD

FROT & CONF DEFT

CONSULAR D

GIFD

MOMS.D

CONFIDENTIAL

PRIORITY

CYPHER CAT/A

CONFIDENTIAL

TOP COPY

HONG KONG 10/9315Z

CONFIDENTIAL

TO PRIORITY F C O TELEGRAM NUMBER 472 CF 10 JULY INFO PRIORITY

PEKING.

MY TELEGRAM NO. 472. 2452?/

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS,

NAMES AND RELEASE DATES FOLLOW:~

MA SHU -KEUNG

16.7.71

YIM KUN -SAU 16.7.71

LING SUET -KEUNG

16.7.71

FUNG MOON

16.7.71

SO PUN

16.7.71

NG KIN-PIU

16.7.71

CHAU SIK-KEUNG 12.8.71

TSANG FAI➡MING 13.8.71

CHAN WING-CHEUNG 13.9.71

IP YUEN-KWAN - 4.10.71

CHAN HON 18.13.71

CHAN CHOI 18.1.71

WAN KI 21.11.71

TRENCH

FILES

HKD

FED

SIR S TOMLINSON

NNNNN

Pro 1317

[REPEATED AS REQUESTED/

MR WILFORD

PS TO MR ROYLE

CONFIDENTIAL

PRIORITY

CYPHER/CAT A

FT! HONG KONG 1003202

CONFIDENTI AL

CONFIDENTIAL

Tur

Lur

TO PRIORITY F C O TELEGRAM NUMBER 471 OF 13 JULY 1971*PRIORITY

UFO PEKING.

MY TELEGRAM 198 TO YOU: CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

FEA

THE PRISON BOARD OF REVIEW MET AGAIN ON 17 JUNE AND RECOMMENDED

REDUCTIONS IN THE SENTENCE OF 13 CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

I HAVE ACCEPTED THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

2. OF THE 13 CONCERNED, FOUR WERE DUE FOR RELEASE IN 1972

AND NINE IN 1973. THEIR SENTENCES RANGED FROM SEVEN YEARS TO

NINE YEARS. THE BOARD OF REVIEW'S' RECOMMENDATIONS WERE THAT

THE SENTENCES SHOULD BE REDUCED IN SIX CASES TO FIVE YEARS AND

IN SEVEN CASES TO SIX YEARS.

IX YEARS. A LIST OF NAMES AND NEW DATES

OF RELEASE IS IN M I FT. FULLER DETAILS FOLLOW BY BAG.

3. THE RESULTS OF THESE DECISIONS ARE THAT SIX PRISONERS WILL

BE RELEASED ON JULY 16, TWO IN AUGUST, ONE IN SEPTEMBER,

THREE IN OCTOBER AND ONE IN NOVEMBER.

THERE ARE AT PRESENT 37 CONFRONTATION PRISONERS HELD IN

STANLEY. APART FROM THE 13 HOW TO BE RELEASED THIS YEAR ON THE

BOARD'S RECOMMENDATIONS, ONLY ONE OTHER PRISONER IS DUE FOR RELEASE THIS YEAR. IN OTHER WORDS, AT THE END OF THE YEAR WE EXPECT TO HAVE IN STANLEY 23 CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

5. THE BOARD OF REVIEW WILL CONTINUE TO MEET IN THE ORDINARY

WAY, ITS NEXT MEETING WILL DE IN SEPTEMBER. BUT ALL THE LIKELY

CASES FOR REDUCTION OF SENTENCE HAVE NOW BEEN CAREFULLY EXAMINED

BY THE BOARD AND BY ME. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT ONE OR TWO PRISONERS

MAY AT ASOME TIME IN THE FUTURE HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE IN THEIR

FAVOUR BY THE BOARD OF REVIEW BUT IT WOULD BE UNIISE TO COUNT

UPON IT AND IT IS CERTAIN THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE 23 LEFT

AT THE END OF THE YEAR WILL NOT. THIS REFLECTS THE SIMPLE

FACT THAT WE ARE LEFT MAINLY WITH OFFENDERS WHO ARE KNOWN TO

HAVE COMMITTED VIOLENT ATTACKS UPON THE POLICE AND OTHER CITIZENS.

IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE OF COURSE THAT A MEDICAL OR COMPASSIONATE

CASE WILL ARISE. WE HAVE A REGULAR PROCEDURE FOR REVIEWING SUCH

CASES.

CONFIDENTIAL

/6. WE HAVE IN OTHER WORDS

of 1817

.CONFIDENTIAL

WE HAVE IN OTHER WORDS VIRTUALLY COME TO THE END OF THE

POSSIBILITY OF RELEASING CONFRONTATION PRISONERS ON RECOMMENDATIONS

FROM THE BOARD OF REVIEW.

7. IT IS FOR CONSIDERATION HOW MUCH SHOULD BE SAID TO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. YOU WILL CERTAINLY WISH TO GIVE THEM THE USUAL ONE

OR TWO DAYS' NOTICE OF THE SIX RELEASES TO TAKE PLACE ON FRIDAY

JULY 16. IT SEEMS TO ME INADVISABLE TO GIVE THEM NOW THE FULL

PICTURE OF RELEASES UP TO NOVEMBER BECAUSE IT MIGHT

UNNECESSARILY DRAW THEIR ATTENTION, TO THE FACT THAT AT THE END

OF THE YEAR THERE WILL BE 23 ODD PRISONERS STILL IN GAOL. 1 HOPE

MOREOVER NOTHING WILL BE SAID WHICH MIGHT ENCOURAGE AN IMPRESSION THAT ALL WILL BE RELEASED BY THEN. I SUGGEST THAT IT MIGHT

BE BEST TO TELL THE CHINESE IN THE

FIRST STAGE OF THE SIX PRISONERS

TO BE RELEASED ON JULY 16 AND THE TWO TO OE RELEASED ON 12

AND 13 AUGUST AND THEN ON ABOUT 10 SEPTEMBER TO INFORM THEM

OF THE FURTHER FIVE RELEASES PLANNED FOR SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER. WẸ WOULD MAKE A LOW LEVEL PRESS RELEASE ON THE SAME LINES ON JULY 16. I SHOULD BE GLAD TO KNOW WHETHER YOU AGREE

WITH THIS TWO-BITE PROCEDURE.

TRENCH

[REPEATED AS REQUESTED I

DEPARTMENTAL DISTRIBUTION

FED

HKD

PUSD IRD

CONS D GIPD NEWS D

-2-

CONFIDENTIAL

MJ 2% Mr. Wilfre

TRICTED

Походам

Mr. Morgan. Ilmantrais that I subsequent minham not very happy 129. about this meeting taking place wow

Mr. Morgan, FED

the matter in жене

186

But let us Hcamider

september. A.R.

I met the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires the other night at the Pakistan High Commission. He raised with me again the question of confrontation prisoners in Hong Kong mentioning that he hoped the satter would be resolved by the time the present Governor's tour of duty came to an end. I said to Mr. Fei that, as he knew, we had the question of confrontation prisoners very much in mind.

It was, however, not an saay question to resolve though we knew what the Chinese position was. It was cost important for us to proceed within the law or there could be serious problems in Hong Kong. As he knew, releases which had taken place so far had been on the advice of the Prison Board of Review and this we thought as the correct way to proceed.

Mr. Fei then maked me when ir D. Tranon would be leaving and what Sir M. Xaciehose's plans were for taking up his ost, I said that Sir D. Trench would

French would be leaving about the middle of üstüber and there would probably be a gap of three weeks to a month between his departure and the new Governor's arrival, I asked Mr. Fei if he had ever set Sir V. KaeLehose and he said he had not done so. I said that 8ir M. Maalehose would be in London from time to time over the next few months and enquired if he would be interested in musting him if this could be arranged. He did not give me any particular answer to this.

3. I understand that at his nesting with Mr. Royle this morning he mentioned our conversation and said that he would like to ment Sir M, NaoLehoue if this was possible, Mr. Royle, I gather, has some doubts whether this wold be a good thing suggesting that the Chinese might be able tɔ represent in some way that Fr. Pei was giving the new Governor the onos over. I recognise that this in a rosaibility though I rather doubt if the Chinese would take this attitude if indeed a meeting were arranged. I had in mind that if a Boeting took place - and this wold be dependent in the first place u; on Girl. Macŭenese saying that he was agreeable it should be on

a social occasion, e.g. Mr. Pel is coming to lunch with me at home on 10 July. In the past there used to be contacts of an unofficial kind between the Gover:ørs of Hong Kong and officials in Chian. For example, I recall ir A. Grantham paying a visit to the Chargé d'Affaires in Peking in the course of which informal meetings were arranged. For myself I would see no objection te Er. Pai and the Governor-designate meeting informally, but if Ɛir M, NaoLehose or Mr. Royla were against this I think that it willnot be difficuit to get out of the meeting on the grouide that Sir H. MaeLehose will shortly be travelling abroad for a month or more and that he will be vory busy with final briefing when he is next in London,

22 June 1971

Copies to:

M Milford

FEST 14/1

Jur.

Mr. Logan Hong Kong Department

Kr Wilford

Sir M MacLehose

Mr Logan

inth

RESTRICTED

MEETING BETWEEN THE CHINESE CHARGÉ D'AFFAIRES AND

THE GOVERNOR DESIGNATE OF HONG KONG

1. Mr Wilford's minute of 22 June.

મ

I think that Mr P'ei's statement to Mr Royle on 22 June has rather changed the situation. He would never have raised it with a Minister without having referred to Peking and been instructed to accept Mr Wilford's offer. For us now to refuse could be seen by the Chinese as a hardening of our policy.

3. I think that the arguments for and against the meeting are in fact finely balanced. Kr P'el could raise sensitive issues such as a Chinese Commissiour for Hong Kong. The Chinese could also argue that as he had met Mr P'ei Sir M MacLehose should have no difficulty in regular dealings with a designated Chinese in Hong Kong. It could give the Chinese an excuse for saying they had met and approved of the new Governor although I think it would be unlikely for them to be so rash as to commit themselves at this stage. This argument also cannot be sustained on the timing.

4. On the other hand it could start the new Governor on a basis which could lead to the more workmanlike relations with the Chinese which have been our aim. It would give him an opportunity to explain the reality and complexity of aspects of the Hong Kong Government in particular the working of the Prison Board of Review. On balance I think that the point in my paragraph 1 above is overriding. Both Mr Laird and I attach the greatest importance to Sir M MacLehoae's wishes. Te both spoke to him about this yesterday. Sir M MacLehoa e said that the issues were finely balanced and that as he would not be available for 2 months we could mull them over. He Bubsequently came to my office and said that his inclination was in favour of a meeting but he would like it arranged as informally as possible. He proposed that he should "drop in for a drink" at my house when Plei was there for dinner (we had not then seen Mr Wilford's proposal) I am not sure that we

need be quite so byzantine if a decision in favour were taken. He asked that Hong Kong should not be consulted. I told him that they would be receiving a copy or the record of Nr P'ei's talk with Mr Royle. Sir M MacLehose asked to see the Department's views after Mr Wilford had had an opportunity to comment but before submission to Ministers.

RESTRICTED

ג.

RESTRICTED

5. My recommendation would be that we look at this again in 2 months when Sir M Meglehose would be available There could have been changes, in either direction in the state of our relations with China by then We should not in the meantime give any guidance to Mr P'ei about the chances of a meeting taking place. If our general relations have continued to improve my inclination would be in favour,

Mr Laird concurs.

23 June 1971

Copy to: Mr Laird (Hong Kong Dept)

RESTRICTED

- 2 -

J AL Morgan

Far Eastern Department

Mr. Morgan, FED

RESTRICTED

418

I met the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires the other night at the Pakistan High Commission. He raised with me again the question of confrontation prisoners in Hong Kong mentioning that he hoped the matter would be resolved by the time the present Governor's tour of duty came to an end. I said to Mr. Pel that, as he knew, we had the question of confrontation prisoners very much in mind.

It was, however, not an easy question to resolve though we knew what the Chinese position was. It was most important for us to proceed within the law or there could be serious problems in Hong Kong. As he knew, releases which had taken place so far had been on the advice of the Prison Board of Review and this we thought was the correct way to proceed.

Mr. Pei then asked me when Sir D. Trench would be leaving and what Sir M. MacLehose's plans were for taking up his post. I said that Sir D. Trench would be leaving about the middle of October and there would probably be a gap of three weeks to a month between his departure and the new Governor's arrival, I asked Mr. Pel if he had ever met Sir M. MacLehose and he said he had not done so. I said that Sir M. MacLehose would be in London from time to time over the next few months and enquired if he would be interested in meeting him if this could be arranged. He did not give me any particular

answer to this

3. I understand that at his meeting with Mr. Royle this morning he mentioned our conversation and said that he would like to meet Sir M. MacLehose if this was possible. Mr. Royle, I gather, has some doubts whether this would be a good thing suggesting that the Chinese might be able to represent in some way that Mr. Pei was giving the new Governor the once over. I recognise that this is a possibility though I rather doubt if the Chinese would take this attitude if indeed a meeting were arranged. I had in mind that if a meeting took place and this would be dependent in the first place upon Sir M. MacLehose saying that he was agreeable it should be on

a social occasion, e.g. Nr. Pei is coming to lunch with me at home on 10 July. In the past there used to be contacts of an unofficial kind between the Governors of Hong Kong and officials in China. For example, I recall Sir A. Grantham paying a visit to the Chargé d'Affaires in Peking in the course of which informal meetings were arranged. For myself I would see no objection to Hr. Pei and the Governor-designate meeting informally, but if Sir M. MacLehose or Mr. Royle were against this I think that it willhot be difficult to get out of the meeting on the grounds that Sir M. MacLehose will shortly be travelling abroad for a month or more and that he will be very busy with final briefing when he is next in London.

Mr.

22 June 1971

Coples to: Hr.

هنا

RESTRICTED

K M Wilford

Mr. Vorgan, FED

RESTRICTED

In Mugar

Мида

Dilyn maria this

ما

ул

to In Nachshon

Yesterday? En

23/6

I met the Chinese Chargé d'Affaires the other night at the Pakistan High Commission. He raised with me again the uestion of confrontation prisoners in Hong Kong mentioning that he hoped the matter would be resolved by the time the present Governor's tour of duty came to an end. I said to Mr. Pei that, as he knew, we had the question of confrontation prisoners very much in mind.

It was, however, not an easy question to resolve though we knew what the Chinese position was. It was most important for us to proosed within the law or there could be serious problems in Hong Kong. As he knew, releases which had taken place so far had been on the advice of the Prison Board of Review and this we thought was the correct way to proceed.

Mr. Pai then asked me when Dir D. Trench would be leaving and what Sir 1. NaoLehose's plans were for taking up his post.

I said that Sir D. Trench would be leaving about the middle of October and there would probably be a gap of three weeks to a month between his departure and the new Governor's arrival, I asked är. Fei ir he had ever met Bir M. MacLehose and he said he had not done so. said that Sir N. MacLehose would be in London from time to time over the next few months and enquired if he would be interested in meeting him if this could be arranged, He did not give me any particular answer to this,

3. I understand that at his meeting with Mr. Royle this morning he mentioned our conversation and said that he would like to meet Sir K. MaoLehose if this was possible. Mr. Royle, I gather, has some doubts whether this would be a good thing suggesting that the Chinese Light be able to represent in some way that Kr. Fei waa giving the new Governor the once over. I recognise that this is sponsibility though I rather doubt if the Chinese would take this attitude if indeed a meeting were arranged. I had in mind that if a meeting took place and this wold be dependent in the first place upon Sir 3, MacLehose saying that he was agreeable it should be on

a social occasion, e.g. Mr. Pei is coming to lunch with me at home on 10 July. In the past there used to be contacts of an unofficial kind between the Gover ora of Hong Kong and officials in China. For example, I recall Sir A. Grantham paying a visit to the Chargé d'Affaires in Peking in the course of which informal meetinge were arranged, For myself I would see no objection to Mr. Pai and the Governor-designate meeting informally, but if Sir N. MaoLenses or Mr. Royle were against this I think that it willnot be difficult to get out of the meeting on the grounds that Sir M. MacLehose will shortly be travelling abroad for a month or more and thất hạ will be very busy with final briefing when he is next in London,

22 June 1971

Copies to:

Mr. Logan

Hong Kʊng Department

Kilford

PRIORITY

CYPHER CAT/A

TOP COPY

CONFIDENT LAB

FM HONG KONG 03/01032

CONFIDENTIAL

TO PRIORITY F.C.O. TELNO 452 OF 3 JULY 1971. PRIORITY INFO CHARGE D'AFFAIRES, PEKING.

FOR WILFORD FROM TRENCH.

YOUR TEL NO. 475.

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

BOARD OF REVIEW HAS RECOMMENDED EARLY RELEASE (PHASED OVER PERIOD JULY OCTOBER) OF 13 REPEAT 13 PRISONERS. I HAVE NOT

SEEN THE RECOMMENDATIOMS YET BUT THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THEY WILL BE ACCEPTABLE. PLEASE TAKE NO ACTION WITH CHINESE REPRESENTATIVES OR GIVE ANY PUBLICITY UNTIL | TELEGRAPH FURTHER.

TRENCH

FILES

HKD

FED

SIR L MONSON

SIR S TOMLINSON*

MR WILFORD

PS TO MR ROYLE

NNNNN

CONFIDENTIAL

хово 1317

PRIORITY

CYPHER CAT/A

FM FCO 011723Z

CONFIDENTIAL

CONTIDENTIAL

1OF COPY

(FKP)

TO PRIORITY GOV. HONG KONG TELEGRAM NUMBER 475 OF 1 JULY FOR POLITICAL ADVISER FROM WILFORD,

CONFRONTATION PRISONERS.

WE HAD EXPECTED A MEETING OF BOARD OF REVIEW IN JUNE. HAS IT TAKEN PLACE AND, IF SO, WITH WHAT RESULT?

DOUGLAS-HOME

FILES

CRUD

FED

SIR I MOHSON

SIR 3 TOMLINSON KR WILFORD

IS TO NR ROYLE

FFFFF

CONFIDENTIAL

Ab1317

FEH 14/1

Registry No.

DEPARTMENT

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION PRIORITY MARKINGS

Top Secret

Confidential Kingd Undecided

Ex-Clair.

Cypher

Draft Telegram to:-

Mimmediate. Priority

(Date)

• Date and time (G.M.T.) telegram should

Despatched

reach, addressce(a)

212/28

GUD

CYTHER

Security classification CONFIDENTIAL 0117202

-if any

[Codeword-if any)

Addressed to

For. Hoy Kong selegram No.

(Date)

And 10:-

475

gor. Hong Kong

And to.....

น่า

repeated for information to

__(date)

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

Repeat to:-

Saving to.

. A

FIL

1.7.10

Saving to:----

For Political Adviser from Wilford.

Comfrontation prisoners.

I've had expected

17 Reviews

meeting of

Brand

- June. Has it taken place

and if so, with what result?

123°

Distribution:-

Sur & Mosa

min

نگ

Copier lo

Mi milford P.S.KM: Rayle

Mrs

CONFIDENTIAL

Arford

Mr Logan

lir Graham

FEH 14

enter & for SM. 18.6

34188

DEPORTATION OF HONG KONG COMMUNIST PRISONERS TO CHINA

1. The Secretary of State has asked (Lisbon telegram No 253 of 4 June) whether we could deport Hong Kong Communist prisoners to China.

2. This method was tried several times in 1968 but the Chinese refused to accept them. On 14 March 1968 a test case was made of two Hong Kong Communist film stars Shek Tai and Fu Ki. They were presented at Lowu, the railway station on the Hong Kong/China border, for "release in China". The Chinese refused them entry and subsequently protested to our Chargé d'Affaires in Peking that this was a disguised form of deportation and a new method of persecution.

3. On 11 April 1968 our Chargé in Peking raised the possibility of deportation with Jo Kuei-po, the Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister. Lo denounced the suggestion and said that the Chinese Government could not possible agree to it. further approach was made in Hong Kong to the New China News Agency branch there to test their reaction to the deportation of an arrested Chinese agent, but NOHA refused to discuss the matter.

4. Then the then Foreign Secretary, Mr Brown, wrote to Ch'en Yi on 30 August 1967 about Sino-British relations, he referred to the possibility of deportation for Hong Kong prisoners. The Chinese Government made no reply to the letter.

Chinese objections to deportation are probably:-

Chinese inability to secure the release in Hong Kong of their supporters would be publicly demonstrated.

The Chinese are concerned that the prisoners might refuse deportation; the sulting publicity would be very damaging to the Chinese cause.

Acceptance of deportation might prejudice their claim that Hong Kong is part of China.

- 1 ·

CONFIDENTIAL

5. Hong Kong Department concur.

9 June 1971

Copied to:

Mr Deunt

Mr Laird

}

Arm

whid wehEHE

before

Sir L Monson ę write.

SALMorgan

J AL Morgan

Far Eastern Department

afraid that this is a

problim

tried to resolve by reportation

but we have himse ben able toma

M: Pei rances with me

again

11 June the

remaining prisoners relating their release ao Chon Enlai

did to 5...). Trench's departure.

be shall soon have

み

to look at this question again. If

a relatively small number

left with

whosh whatever world in

be completed say in 1972

mingtet

be able for permate to Chinese to take them off on hands for a "holiday", But I am not optimthic.

Nava theless this re

Kemsite.

option warthall have

Key Wilford/

The handling of free has sen

CONFIDENTIAL

ups 187

Ky=ilford

ра

FER

FEA

By.

DE CONTATION DE BORD KUSS ODIN ULIOF PRISONMS TO OPELNA

The Jeemiary of State has asked (Lisbon belegram No 253 (2 4 Jasa) whether we could deport Hong Kong CommunÅ 0%

risoners tɔ China.

This method was tried several times in 1960 but the Chinese refused to accept them, On 14 Marek 1960 a test sade was made of two Rong Kang Communist film staze Shož Ɛai undľu Xi. They were presented at Lewn, the railway station on the song Reng/Chias border, for "reisene in Chime". The Miasse refused thom entry and subsequently protested to our Chargé &'iffaires in ceking that this was a disguised fom of deportation and

method of persecution,

On 11 April 1968 our Murgể in Puring rained the @sibility of deportatiun with o Kael-ço, the Chinese Deputy Foreign Xinister. Le denethood the anggestion met mid that the Chinese Government gəɔuld not possible agros to it. further approach was mãe in Hong Kong to the lowJOmina Xeon Agunay branek there te boet their reaction to the de,ertation of an arrested Chingue agant, but 1CHA rofzood diiouns the matter,

ben_the_then Foreign Secretary, är krom, wrote te Oh'en Lù en 30 August 1964 about Sino-british relations, referred to the possibility of deportation for Hang Seng prisoners. The Chinese Ooreznment made nɔ reply to the letter.

neme objections to deportation are probably 1-

Chinese inability to somure the release in Rong their supporters would be ublicly denonatrɛtað.

The Chinese are tundemed that the prisoners night refuse deportation; the moulting ;ublicity would be very

fuboging to the Chinese anua

kebeptense of deportation might prejudice their olaia that liong Kong is part of Jhine.

- 1 -

OSSPLZENTIAL

[

13 An

2 -

IMMEDIATE

CYPHER CAT A

CONFIDENTIAL

Head of FED.

COPY NO:

FX LISBON 343923Z

CONFIDENTIAL

TO IMEDIATE FCO TELNO 253 OF 4' JURE.

FOLLOWING FOR MCCLUNEY AND MILFORD FROM PRIVATE SECRETARY,

THE SECRETARY OF STATE HAS MINUTED ON PEKING TELEGRAM TO FOO

NO. 592 OF 2 JUNE QUOTE CAN WE DEPORT THEM TO CHINA? UNQUOTE.

MUIRHEAD

PRISEC

CONFIDENTIAL

362

enter - fr.~. SM. 27.5

・27.4

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London S.W.1

From The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State

26 April, 1971.

Thank you for your letter of 8 April to

Alec Douglas-Home enclosing a letter (which I return) from a constituent about the release of communist prisoners in Hong Kong.

All long-term prisoners in Hong Kong, including those convicted of offences during the disturbances in 1967 are eligible for remission of sentence. is normal for their sentences to be reviewed regularly by the Prison Board of Review, which makes recommendations to the Governor. The prisoners to whom your constituent referred were released on the recommendation of the Prison Board in accordance with these procedures. There has been no question of interference with judicial processes.

Miss Mary Holt, MP., House of Commons,

London, SW1.

Anthony Royle

(145181) D4 737490 750M 171 HWG

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

Registry No.

FEH 14/1

DRAFT

Type 1 +

Letter

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

To:-

Top Secret

Secret.

Confidential.

Restricted.

Unclassified

PRIVACY MARKING

In Confidence

-+---‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒‒IWNIKALI

1717

Miss Mary Holt MP

House of Commons London SW1

From

Mr Royle

Telephone No. & Ext.

Department

Thank you for your letter of 8 April to

Alec Douglas-Home enclosing a letter (which I

return) from a constituent about the release of

communist prisoners in Hong Kong..

All long-term prisoners in Hong Kong, including

those convicted of offences during the disturbances

in 1967 are eligible for remission of sentence.

is normal for their sentences to be reviewed

regularly by the Prison Board of Review, which makes

mayaman Tallone to the Governor. The prisoners to

which your constituent referred were released on

whom

the recommendation of the Prison Board in accordance

with these/procedures.

of interference with judicial processes."

23/4

Mr Wilford

Mr Logan

Jogan

RELEASE OF CONFRONTATION PRISONERS IN HONG KONG:

LETTER FROM MISS HOLT MP

1. I attach a draft reply, agreed with Hong Kong

Department, to Miss Holt's letter of 8 April.

23 April 1971

SALMorgan

JAL Morgan

Far Eastern Department

23/cr