Page 112 - The Persian Gulf Historical Summaries (1907-1953) Vol II_Neat
P. 112

96
                (Appendix 1 (i)). He did not make any claim on account of the expenses he had
                incurred in the litigation nor did His Majesty’s Government make any deduction
                from his claim on account of the payment made to him in 1940 to cover taxation
                (paragraph 136 below). Litigation over a portion of the Faddaghiyah properly
                started in 1932 and continued until 1943 when the Court of Cassation decided that
                the property was to be considered “ as Amiriyah land authorised by Tapu ” to
                the Ruler and other members of his family. Nothing further had been heard
                about this property by the end of 1953. The course of the litigation over the
                Fao property, which began in 1943 and was still continuing at the end of 1953, is
                narrated below (paragraphs 138-139).
                    132.  In 1930 His Majesty’s Government took the view that their obligations
               under the guarantee of 1914 (paragraph 128 above) devolved on Iraq under
               Article 8 of the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1930.(,‘,°") The Iraqi Government never
               specifically accepted this view, but it was agreed between the United Kingdom High
               Commissioner in Iraq and the Iraqi Prime Minister in an exchange of letters
               (Appendix I (ii) and (iii)) in August 1930 that the obligation should be included in
                the list of international obligations devolving on Iraq under the Treaty, with a
               footnote to the effect that private negotiations were proceeding with a view to its
               liquidation and that if these were successful the question would be discussed further
               between the two Governments.*309) The undertaking entered into with the Ruler of
               Kuwait in respect of his date gardens in Iraq was included in the list of International
               Instruments referred to in Article 8 of the 1930 Treaty accordingly.*310) The High
               Commissioner subsequently tried to effect a settlement by direct negotiation between
               the Iraqi Government and the Ruler on the basis of the purchase of the gardens
               by the former, but the emissary whom the Iraqi Government sent to Kuwait for
               discussions made no mention of the purchase of the gardens but merely informed
               the Ruler that his Government insisted on its right to tax his estates but would
               be content with the sum of £4,500 a year only. The Ruler declined this offer and
               referred the matter to His Majesty’s Government.
                   133.  In 1932 when a decision had been given against the Ruler in the litigation
               over the Bashiyah estate (paragraph 131 above), he requested His Majesty’s
               Government to safeguard his interests in his property. Accordingly in May 1933
               King Faisal was asked to intervene and undertook to ensure that the Ruler would
               remain in possession of his date gardens, an assurance which he reaffirmed at an
               interview with the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in June of the same
               year.*311) Faisal died shortly afterwards, but in September 1933 King Ghazi
               reaffirmed his father's promise.*312)
                   134.  At this time His Majesty’s Government were concerned both with a
               tax called the Istihlak tax which the Iraqi Government had imposed in 1932 on the
               produce of date gardens and with the possibility of the Ruler's losing part of his
               property as a result of litigation. The Law Officers of the Crown who had been
               considering the legal aspects of the 1914 guarantee expressed the view that His
               Majesty’s Government were under a legal obligation to compensate the Ruler in
               respect of any tax which he might be compelled to pay and of any property of
               which he might be deprived by litigation.*313) In April 1938 representatives of the
               Foreign Office, India Office and Treasury agreed that the 1914 guarantee covered
               all the properties in the de facto possession of Shaikh Mubarak in 1914.(3“) Later
               in 1949 the Legal Adviser of the Foreign Office held that the guarantee applied to
               Mubarak’s personal share in the properties only (and not to the shares of his
               collaterals) and that it has since extended to such of them as are in the possession
               of his lineal descendants.*313) So far as is known this position has never been
               explained to the Ruler.
                   135 Various suggestions for dealing with the problems raised by the date
               gardens were considered during 1934 and 1935 and eventually in July 1936 a
               letter*31*) (Appendix I (iv)) was addressed to the Iraqi Minister for Foreign Affairs m
                  r,or) o 280. Vol. 132. State Papers.
                  r30*) CO to F.O. 78388/30 of August 22. 1930 (E4560/1192/93 of 1930).
                  (ai») F.O. Confidential Print. 16016 (E 6272/41/93 of 1930).
                         from*Bagdad W F.o! 364 of September 16. 1933 (E 5462/308/93 of 1933).
                  (3'3) (E 1735/308/93 of 1933.)
                  (>•*) (E 2751/28/93 of 1938.)
                  Pj                        358 of July ,5. 1936 (H 4766/18/93 of 1936).
   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117