CONFIDENTIAL
PP HONG KONG
GRS 657
CONFIDENTIAL
FM FCO 301301Z APR 85
TO PRIORITY HONG KONG
TELEGRAM NUMBER 600 OF 30 APRIL
46
15201
1
Никонорн
- MAY 1985
z
BOYD'S TELELETTER OF 27 APRIL : HONG KONG AND THE GATT
FOLLOWING IS THE TEXT OF GALSWORTHY'S FIRST TELELETTER OF 22
APRIL TO BOYD NOW REPEATED TO YOU. ORIGINAL WAS NOT SENT DUE TO
ERROR IN COD:
BEGINS
HONG KONG AND THE GATT
19
2
1. I KNOW THAT YOU WISH TO PUT PROPOSALS ON GATT TO EXCO AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, (YOUR TELNOS 294 AND 565) AND IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO
BRING YOU UP TO DATE WITH OUR THINKING. WE AGREE WITH YOU AND PEKING (YOUR SECOND TUR AND PEKING TELNO 375) THAT WE SHOULD WORK
OUT OUR POSITION IN TIME FOR THE FIRST MEETING OF THE JOINT
LIAISON GROUP. INDEED WE BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD AIM TO PRODUCE A
PAPER FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE CHINESE AT THAT MEETING.
2. HAVING RECEIVED DAME ANNE WARBURTON'S TELELETTER OF 11
MARCH, WE HAVE CONSULTED FRED BURROWS AND THE DTI ABOUT THE
PROCEDURE WHICH THE GATT LEGAL ADVISER SUGGESTS FOR SEEKING
CONTRACTING PARTY STATUS FOR HONG KONG (PARA 5 OF TUR). THIS
PROCEDURE IS BROADLY SIMILAR TO THE PROPOSALS IN PARAS 2 AND 3 OF
OUR TELNO 509 OF 1984, AND, GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE ARE HAPPY TO
GO ALONG WITH THE IDEA OF THREE DECLARATIONS.
3. IN LIGHT OF THE GATT LEGAL ADVISER'S COMMENTS WE HAVE
PRODUCED ILLUSTRATIVE FIRST DRAFTS OF THE THREE TYPES OF
DECLARATION REFERRED TO IN PARA 5 OF TUR (SEE MIFTL). WE SENT
THESE DRAFTS TO THE DTI FOR THEIR COMMENTS AND IN DOING SO DREW
THEIR ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING POINTS:
(A) OUR LEGAL ADVISERS HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THE GATT DRAWS NO
DISTINCTION BETWEEN 'DE JURE' AND 'DE FACTO' PARTIES AND THAT WE
SHOULD NOT ACCEPT THAT ANY SUCH DISTINCTION EXISTS, NOR DEPOSIT
ANY DOCUMENT WITH THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL WHICH USES THOSE TERMS.
ACTION BY US BEFORE 1997 UNDER ARTICLE XXVI (5) (C) OUGHT TO
1
CONFIDENTIAL
48