_ACC 210/1
HECINEL
3 JUL 1936
587
FROM: PAUL FIFOOT
DEPUTY LEGAL ADVISER
PATE: 6 JUNE 1986
Week Mr Layden, HKD
Mr Eaton
ILO CONVENTIONS
1.
Thank you for drawing my attention to Hong Kong telegram number 1689. I think the substance of this issue (i.e. whether Article 35.4 of the ILO constitution is applicable in respect of conventions which have not been ratified by the metropolitan country) falls within your province. Neither you nor I addressed the point in those terms in our earlier minutes, though it is probably implicit in our view that an Article 35.4 extension is separately terminable. I would be grateful if you would let me have a copy of any minute you write on the subject.
2.
The construction of Article 35.4 is of course only one part of the problem. Assuming that it is possible to apply an ILO Convention to a self-governing non metropolitan territory even though the metropolitan country has not ratified the Convention in respect of its metropolitan territory, the metropolitan country will still remain internationally responsible for the observance of obligations under the Convention by the non metropolitan territory. It would therefore be a matter of policy for the metropolitan country to decide whether it wished the non metropolitan territory to attract its international obligations in this way.
3.
With regard to the particular application of these consideration to Hong Kong, we have the additional question whether the subject matter of the particular Convention is within its "self governing powers".
I have taken this point up with Hong Kong Department which is giving consideration to it.
болерот
Paul Fifoot