Page 109 - Historical Summaries (Persian Gulf - Vol II) 1907-1953

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 property
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 properly, 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.(30*) 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.C09) 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.C'0) 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.^13) 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(3,#) (Appendix I (iv)) was addressed to the Iraqi Minister for Foreign Affairs m
(•••) p. 280. Vol. 132. State Papers.
(”•) C.O. to F.O. 78388/30 of August 22. 1930 (E 4560/1192/93 of 1930).
(*>“) F.O. Confidential Print. 16016 (E 6272/41 /93 of 1930).
(31») (E 3727/308/93 of 1933.)
(312) Tel. from Bagdad to F.O. 364 of September 16, 1933 (E 5462/308/93 of 1933).
(313) (E 1735/308/93 of 1933.)
(3“) (E 2751/28/93 of 1938.)
(3,s) (E 10214/1083/91 of 1949.) ,
(3“) Bagdad to F.O. Despatch No. 358 of July 15, 1936 (E 4766/18/93 of 1936).