€
28
ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CHAMBERS
HONG KONG
The Governor's Comments did not reach us
murtil
ANG
//68.
11.000.
Sir James McPetrie, C.M.G., O.B.E.,
Commonwealth Office,
Downing Street,
LONDON, S.W.1.
Dear Hamish.
19th December, 1967.
Hong Kong Public Order Ordinance, 1967.
This Ordinance came into force on the 17th November, 1967. You may recall that we submitted a draft to the Secretary of State, that he came back with objections to certain clauses (particularly those dealing with unlawful assembly and riot) and we amended the Bill to accord with his comments.
The Ordinance has, generally speaking, been widely welcomed and supported by the local population, particularly by the Chinese, who realize that close control of public meetings is vital here.
There has, however, been some opposition from the Communists and the "Reform Club" which is a European dominated society with about 5,000 paid up members. Both of these groups complain that it is too stringent (though not from entirely the same motives, I hope!)
The Reform Club has submitted a petition to the Queen, asking that the power of disallowance should be exercised. I believe that this petition and the Governor's comments should have reached the C.0. by now.
The first object of this letter is to ask you whether you could try to speed up the machinery within the C.0. for dealing with disallowance, in respect of this Ordinance. As the Bill was cleared with the S. of S., we imagine that he should not have too much difficulty in advising that the Ordinance should not be disallowed. An early decision would, however, prevent further speculation here, as the Reform Club is giving the impression that the chances of the Ordinance being disallowed are good, although it was stated in the Legislative Council that the S. of S. had approved the Bill in draft.
I would welcome your guidance on another aspect of the matter. The Reform Club, according to local newspaper reports, has persuaded an M.P. named Rankin to "present a petition" to the House of Commons, asking that the Ordinance be disallowed. What would the usual procedure now be in dealing with such a petition? I suppose the first step would be for it to be referred to the Committee on Public Petitions, but I'm not clear as to what this Committee does? Will it merely refer the RECEIVED IN
ARCHIVES No. 63
- 50
HWB/4/34
LAST
REF.
NEXT
REF.
Сто вод