CONFIDENTIAL
and not open to question by the judiciary. This is part of our existing common law system. Whether precise wording of draft Basic Law (Article 18) is the most appropriate is a matter for further consideration. But no reason to suspect Chinese
motives.
Interpretation of Basic Law (Article 170). The issue here is
the relationship between the Hong Kong system (under which the
courts interpret laws) and the mainland system (under which the NPC Standing Committee has a power of interpretation). (Basic
Law will be both a PRC law and an SAR law). System envisaged in draft Basic Law (Article 170) allows both the SAR courts and the NPC standing committee to interpret the BL, but provides that the NPC's "interpretation" (which in China has legislative
effect) is binding for the future.
Discussions with Chinese on Government structure?
In a number of contacts between British and Chinese sides at
senior level, views have been exchanged on future Hong Kong
Government structure.
[If pressed: Joint Declaration envisages that the two sides will discuss matters relating to the smooth transfer of government and
procedures for the smooth transition in 1997. In that context,
natural that we should give the Chinese side our views on how
government structures might evolve].
Formation of first SAR Government? Clean break?
Not quite sure what is meant by "break", but see no problem with the two principles: expression of Chinese resumption of
sovereignty over Hong Kong: and smooth transition. Believe important for confidence in Hong Kong to have maximum degree of continuity before and after 1997. Note there are two options listed.
Specific arrangements on transfer of government are complex matters requiring very careful study. Not advisable to come to a hasty conclusion on precise arrangements until permanent SAR
government structure is clearer.
CONFIDENTIAL