HONG KONG
DRAFT ORDER IN COUNCIL
ARGUMENTS FOR AMENDMENT
4.
M.
ACQUISITION OF BN(0) PASSPORTS
ENTITLEMENT TO HOLD BN(0) PASSPORT
1.
This relates to Article 4(2).
2.
It may be argued that, since passports are issued under
the Royal Prerogative, it is constitutionally wrong to provide.
for an entitlement to a BN (0) passport. Alternatively or
additionally it may be argued that it is wrong to set this sort
of precedent, which could lead to demands by other British
nationals to be entitled to hold a passport.
Line to take
3.
This provision reflects. the unique circumstances of the
Hong Kong Agreement and the terms of the UK Memorandum. The
Memorandum quite clearly links the new status with the passport,
and those concerned will expect to see this link reflected in
the Order. Sincer there is a direct and unbreachable link between
BN (0) status and the passport, it would be illogical and incon-
sistent to make the holding of a passport discretionary since
refusal would amount to denial of BN (0) status, which itself is
an entitlement.
4.
Because it reflects the unique circumstances of Hong Kong
and the agreement, it would be wrong to regard it as a precedent
which could be applied to other British nationals. Other British
nationals may choose whether or not to hold a passport: in effect,
BN(0)s do not have that choice, because the terms of the
Memorandum preclude it.
5.
Furthermore, there is a clear distinction between holding
and being in physical possession of a passport. For example,
a person who has lost his passport is regarded as a passport
holder, even though it is not actually in his possession. The actual issue, renewal and replacement of BN (0) passports will be