CONFIDENTIAL
Reference......
रिं
FLAG & FLAG
Omeo
Mr Fifoot
Legal Advisers (W 44/3)
Mr LacLennan (WOD) We agree with Mh. Filoot's view,
Mr Clark (FED) |
agree
with MW
Fifort;
reply is sutery unsatisfactory.
HK's proposed Grigli
EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS HONG KONG
1. Hong Kong have now replied in their telegram No 49 to Mr Stuart's letter of 19 December and our telegram No 1130. They argued that the Convention should still not be extended to Hong Kong and suggest a reply to Mr Percy Grieve's PQ.
2. I see no reason to dissent from Hong Kong's views and recommendations, and shall be glad to know whether you agree. Am I right in thinking that Mr Fifoot rather than Mr Rushford should advise on this question, having been concerned with it earlier
on?
3. We have discovered that Mr Beard, who clearly inspired Mr Grieve's PQ, is not a disinterested party. He was at one time employed by the Government as Chief Banking Inspector of Hong Kong, but resigned shortly after arrival and has been conducting a campaign against the Hong Kong Government ever since because of his alleged unfair treatment by them. He would evidently like to appeal to the Commission on the matter.
R.M. Lo
R B Crows on
15 January 1973
Hong Kong & Indian Ocean Dept
1.
As we anticipated Hong Kong are reluctant to extend the Convention, and we must presumably act on that basis.
2*
I do not think we can explain away Hong Kong's refusal on the grounds that Hong Kong suggests. I went into this question in my minute to Miss Kelly of
1 December. In short:
(a)
it is possible to extend the Convention without accepting the right of individual petition and we have done so;
(b) the Convention has been extended, with the
right of individual petition, to Asian countries in the past. However much one may
CONFIDENTIAL
DD 897261 230443 SOOM 5/72 GM 3643/2