11
1
1880
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL · 14 July 1988
few remarks on the intention and philosophy guiding the drafting of the Basic Law. Its importance is not in question but the extremely detailed consideration of every word in the draft, and the precise meaning variously ascribed to words, groups of words, paragraphs and provisions which has been enthusiastically applied by every legal, administration, human rights and political science expert in Hong Kong and elsewhere, may have two unfortunate results. The first is that the ubiquitous 'man in the street', that is the vast majority of the people of Hong Kong, will become totally confused as to the overall worth of the Basic Law and the degree to which it can be trusted to do what it is fundamentally required to do. That is of course to maintain the present economic and social life style of our people and, as far as possible, to prevent one political system from seriously influencing the system of administration which has been so successful here.
The second unfortunate result may be that the confusion over what is good and what is bad, or merely indifferent in the draft Basic Law will add to the already high level of uncertainty affecting our Chinese middle class who will continue to vote with their feet.
What is far more important, in my view, than legal precision in the Basic Law is the intention of the Chinese Government in agreeing to draft it. It must be fundamentally clear to anyone who has an open mind that China wants Hong Kong to continue to function as we have been functioning for a very long time, as an apolitical, executive led, economically oriented and socially conscious entity, one which contributes substantially to China without stress or threat. This latter quality is obviously very important to China and, given the nature of that country's political system, inevitably results in reluctance to concede to Hong Kong privileges and rights now, which might cause problems later. In other words, I believe that China is doing its utmost to leave the second system intact but must have regard for China's own sovereignty and constitutional authority and rights. We shall argue out the legal interpretation and even the policy content of the Basic Law-and of course it is right that those who feel the draft gives too much weight to China's sovereign rights should speak up now-but it is unrealistic to expect China to provide Hong Kong with de facto independence.
I am in danger of delivering a chapter or two on constitutional philosophy so let me press on with some points which have been made by hard working * committee members in my constituency.
Although the Chinese language will be the official language of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong, the Basic Law Drafting Committee has been asked to recognise English as a second official language. An amendment to article 9 of the draft Basic Law would be required and probably some other legal revision to give this proposal effect. Where there are differences of interpretation the Chinese language would prevail.
It must be obvious to everyone that Hong Kong's international business status and performance owes a great deal to the use of the English language, not