HC Deb 01 November 1948 vol 457 cc491-3
7. Professor Savory

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reply he has received in answer to his protest to the Minister of Foreign Affairs at Prague against the seizure, on 18th October, of Mr. Wallis, Secretary of the Embassy, who was arrested in his office, thrust head-first into a waiting car, where his coat was torn and his glasses broken; and whether he has made a demand for compensation to be paid to Mr. Wallis.

25. Mr. Mott-Radclyffe

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any statement to make regarding the arrest on 18th October by Czech police of the British Information Officer attached to the British Embassy in Prague; and whether the British Information Office building possesses extra-territorial rights.

Mr. Mayhew

As the answer is rather long, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. Mott-Radclyffe

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the British Information Office in Prague possesses extraterritorial rights?

Mr. Mayhew

We are not quite clear on that point.

Mr. Eden

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this British officer has contact with the British representatives in the Embassy?

Mr. Mayhew

Yes, Sir, the officer is not detained.

Following is the answer:

On 18th October, without previously notifying His Majesty's Ambassador, plain clothes policemen raided the office of the British Information Service in Prague and proceeded to arrest one of the Czechoslovak employees of the Embassy during the working hours of the office. Two diplomatic officers of the Embassy, one of whom was Mr. Wallis the Information Officer and a Secretary of the Embassy, at once arrived on the scene and expostulated with the police, who, nevertheless, handcuffed the Czechoslovak employee and dragged him out of the offices in a brutal manner. When the two diplomatic officers of His Majesty's Embassy protested at the actions of the police, without interfering with them, the police seized Mr. Wallis and thrust him into a waiting car in spite of his repeated statements that he was entitled to diplomatic protection. On arrival at the police station Mr. Wallis was able to produce his diplomatic identity card but he was, nevertheless, detained for a further hour and a half. Meanwhile, the police had locked the doors of the British Information Offices and refused to allow anyone to leave including British employees of His Majesty's Embassy, unless they had diplomatic status.

His Majesty's Embassy at once lodged a protest, and demanded the immediate release of Mr. Wallis. He was set at liberty during the afternoon and the police were also withdrawn from the offices of the British Information Offices. In a Note dated 18th October His Majesty's Ambassador protested to the Czechoslovak Government that the police had proceeded to the arrest of a Czechoslovak employee of His Majesty's Embassy without previously warning His Majesty's Ambassador, that they had effected his arrest on premises belonging to the Embassy and during his employment there and had further locked the premises as described. The Ambassador also protested against the arrest of Mr. Wallis a diplomatic officer of His Majesty's Embassy and his detention after he had made his identity known. The Ambassador reserved the right to present subsequently to the Czechoslovak Government a claim for the physical and material damages caused to Mr. Wallis.

The Czechoslovak Government's reply of 20th October stated that the Czechoslovak Government did not recognise that the British or indeed any other foreign Information Offices in Czechoslovakia enjoyed extra-territorial status. Their note contained a qualified expression of regret for any physical and material damage that had been caused to Mr. Wallis, but also made a number of inaccurate allegations regarding the course of events. These were corrected on 22nd October in a further Note from His Majesty's Ambassador, in the course of which it was pointed out that the relevant point was that the police had entered in a high-handed and discourteous way premises which, whether technically extraterritorial or not, must have been known by the police to be used as an office by His Majesty's Embassy, and the improper arrest of a member of the diplomatic staff of His Majesty's Embassy, which was the main source of His Majesty's Government's complaint, resulted from that action.