RESTRICTED
107571 MDHOAN 2162
UNQUOTE.
THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT THAT CONTRAVENE THE CONSTITUTION, THE STATUTES OR THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REGULATIONS SIMILARLY THE STATE COUNCIL, ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 89 OF THE CONSTITUTION, HAS THE POWER QUOTE TO ALTER OR ANNUL INAPPROPRIATE DECISIONS AND ORDERS ISSUED BY LOCAL ORGANS OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES AT DIFFERENT LEVELS UNQUOTE. MOREOVER, A CHART OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE OF THE GOVERNMENT RECENTLY PUBLISHED BY THE PRC PLACED SARS ON THE SAME LEVEL AS PROVINCES, AUTONOMOUS REGIONS, AND SPECIAL MUNICIPALITIES WITH THE STATUS OF PROVINCES. THIS SHOWS THAT AN SAR IS CONSIDERED TO BE A UNIT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT. AND SINCE CHINA IS A CENTRALISED AND UNITARY STATE RATHER THAN A FEDERATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENT ORGANS HAVE VERY LITTLE POWER UNQUOTE.
I NOTE THAT THE HK COURTS WILL NOT BE RELYING ON THE PRC CRIMINAL CODE AFTER 1997 BECAUSE HK WILL RETAIN ITS SEPARATE LEGAL SYSTEM. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE FRAMEWORK OF THAT SYSTEM WILL BE THE BASIC LAW, THE LAWS PREVIOUSLY IN FORCE IN HONG KONG AND LAWS ENACTED BY THE HKSAR LEGISLATURE. I REFER TO A SPEECH BY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF HONG KONG, MR MICHAEL THOMAS QC, AT THE SCHOOL FOR ORIENTAL AND AFRICAN STUDIES ON 26 MAY 1986 WHEN HE STATED: QUOTE THE TERMS OF THE BASIC LAW WILL BE THE LAW OF PRC ENACTED UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE CHINESE CONSTITUTION AND WILL DERIVE THEIR AUTHORITY AND LEGITIMACY FROM THE LAW OF THE NEW
SOVEREIGN POWER.
THE LAWS PREVIOUSLY ENFORCED SHALL BE MAINTAINED SAVE FOR ANY THAT CONTRAVENE THE BASIC LAW AND SUBJECT TO ANY AMENDMENT BY THE
HKSAR LEGISLATURE UNQUOTE.
I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR ASSURANCE THAT NEITHER THE BASIC LAW NOR ENACTMENTS OF THE HKSAR LEGISLATURE WILL ALLOW THE TRANSFER OF PRISONERS FROM HKSAR TO ANOTHER PART OF THE PRC, I CANNOT SEE THAT THE JOINT DECLARATION HAS ANYTHING TO SAY ON THIS MATTER.
I ALSO REFER TO COMMENTS, ON 27TH APRIL 1987, OF THE MAGISTRATE IN THE CASE OF MR L OSMAN. HE CONFIRMED THAT, IN HIS VIEW, THERE WAS NO GUARANTEE THAT THE DEFENDANT, IF EXTRADITED TO HONG KONG AND IF HELD IN CUSTODY ON 1ST JULY 1997, WOULD NOT BE REMOVED TO MAINLAND CHINA AFTER 1ST JULY 1997, I DO NOT OF COURSE SEEK ANY COMMENT ON AN INDIVIDUAL CASE, THIS RULING HOWEVER CLEARLY RAISES A MATTER OF GOVERNMENT POLICY.
I WOULD TURN TO THE MATTER OF PRC FAILURE TO RECOGNISE EITHER THE
3
PAGE
RESTRICTED