CONFIDENTIAL
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London SW1A 2AH
FILE
noted f
Telephone 01- 233 3722
24
T
Bln days
24/4.
A J Pryor Esq
ITP 1
Department of Trade and Industry
1-19 Victoria Street
LONDON
SW1
Jear Mr. Pryor,
HONG KONG: GATT
1.
Your reference
Our reference
Date
4 April 1985
HKK 040/24
APR 1985
Thank you for your letter of 28 March in reply to mine of 15 March to Tony Lane.
2.
I am advised that:
"The GATT draws no distinction between "de jure" and
"de facto" parties and 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 result in Hong Kong being "deemed to be a Contracting Party".
In the light of this, we do not think we should continue to use the terms "de jure" and "de facto" in relation to Hong Kong's participation in GATT. Our understanding is that under Article XXVI(5)(c), Hong Kong is to be "deemed to be a Contracting Party" to the GATT. Para 5(a)-(c) of Dame Anne Warburton's teleletter of 11 March sets dut the views of the GATT Legal Adviser on the best method of ensuring that Hong Kong becomes a Contracting Party to the GATT and remains such a Contracting Party after 1997.
3. Our departmental Legal Counsellor has produced first drafts of the three types of declaration referred to in para 5 of Dame Anne's teleletter. Copies of these are enclosed and I should be grateful for your comments on them. The drafts are for illustrative purposes and reflect the following points:
(a) The points in para 2 above;
(b) We see no need for, but no objection to, the Hong Kong
Government depositing a declaration, referring to the UK's declaration and confirming that it wishes to be deemed a Contracting Party in accordance with Article XXVI (5)(c). Nevertheless, we will have to bear in mind
CONFIDENTIAL
/that