CONFIDENTIAL
C 5. Hong Kong have now pointed out to us that under Section 17(2) of
the BNA a second generation descendant born outside the dependent
155
There
is
territories to a BDTC otherwise than by descent is entitled to be
registered as a BDTC if that descendant is born stateless.
a similar provision under Section 3(2) of the B NA
descendants of British citizens. Hong Kong argue
in
respect of
that we should be
prepared to grant this right of transmissibility
for the
former BDTCs, who would enjoy this right but for
our view this is a strong argument.
to non-Chinese
agreement. In
We have put the point to Home Office officials, who are not
entirely convinced. They are inclined to argue that the provisions
6.
of the BNA apply to BC and BDTC status which are transmissible. BOC
status is not transmissible and SO no analogy can be drawn with
Section 17 of the BNA. However they are not totally dismissive, and I think that the Home Office might be induced to agree.
لا
to
would
7. Certainly, the argument they adduce will not be sufficient
convince Hong Kong. The difficulty is that we have already agreed
that the first generation born to non-Chinese former BDTCs (both
BN (0) s and BOCs) should become BOCs automatically if they
otherwise be stateless and it i s
not also provide for the second
"because BOC status is not
difficult to argue that we should
generation to acquire BOC status
transmissible".
for
I f it were not for the
to be BDTCs and enjoy the
transmit their nationality
two generations. There
is
agreement Hong Kong BDTCs would continue
right under Section 17 of the B NA to
under certain defined circumstances
therefore substance to the argument that we should provide for those
who would otherwise become stateless at least what they would have
had if they had become BDTCs.
him
8. Given that we can see no strong counter argument to Hong Kong's
proposal, I recommend that Mr Luce write to Mr Waddington in the
Home Office in the terms of
of the attached draft letter asking
to agree that the second generation should be treated as if they
putting forward a proposed three pronged defence
were BDTCs and
to
CONFIDENTIAL