مجموعة ٢٥/٣٦ "المراسيم الملكية: مراجعة المراسيم الملكية بشأن الخليج الفارسي" [و‎‎٣] (٤٧٦/٧)

Reference Paper
Legal Adviser’s Department.
Hefei
190 .
While I see no necessity for the inclusion of the
Foreign Jurisdiction Act in the list of 4cts mentioned in
Article 12 (1) of the Order - the Order itself being made
under that Act - I think the reference to Section 6 thereof
in Article 17 of the Order is necessary, or at any rate
advisable,in as much as it is under that Section that power
is conferred to send a person for trial "to any British
possession for the time being appointed on that behalf by
Order in Council'*. The original Article 17 appointed
Bombay. There is, of course, no reason why any other
British possession should not be so appointed, but I think
the place selected should be specified. I may mention in
reference to the Political Residents suggestion,that the
U.K. is not a British possession within the meaning of the
Interpretation Act - nor of course is any other of the
Gulf territories in which His Majesty exercises
jurisdiction. The Political Resident could however, I have
no doubt, always exercise the power to transfer and try
any case himself under Section 526 (l)(iii) of the Criminal
Procedure Code.
I have no comment on the point referred in
paragraph 5 of the rolitical Residents lett^fj^save that
I do not quite follow the necessity mentioned Tji
paragraph 3(^>) of Mr. Harrison's letter of the 11th
September, 1547, for an amendment of Article 20, the present
terms of which appear to cover the sending of the convict
to any foreigh jurisdiction place. This is also apparently
within the powers conferred by Section 7 of the Foreign
Jurisdiction Act.
As to the more general question of an experienced
lawyer being ade available for the trial of important
or diffiou t cases, I agree that such a lawyer could be
appo:lnted ‘.judicial as istant under the Order as it stands,
but I appreciate the difficulty felt by the Political
Resident as to appeals. It is possible* however - and
the ;>oint might perhaps be put to the Foreign Office -
that the difficulty might be met by conferi-ing appellate
jurisdiction in such cases on so e convenient court in
a British possession und r Section 5 of the Foreign
Jurisdiction Act. 7
*
#
13223. I. 1551. 250.—7/1903,