D-/
رہتی
CONFIDENTIAL
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
London SW1A 2AH
J C Griffiths Esq QC
Attorney-General
HONG KONG
kar
28
4:
Telephone 01- 233 3184
Есё нак 2.433
+
Your reference
Our reference
HKK 243/1
Date
6 October 1982
Hkk243/
شتند
HKK243/3 (1983)
CLOSED CAMPS FOR VIETNAMESE REFUGEES
1.
то
221.
Hi25/10
I must apologise for the fact that we were not ready to discuss the human rights implications of the closed camp legis- lation with you when you were in London last month. However, I am now writing with our considered view.
2.
Our Telegram No 482 of 25 June explained briefly why we believed that the courts must be enabled to review the merits of any decision made under the Immigration (Amendment) 1982 Ordinance to confine refugees to closed camps. I enclose a copy of the actual advice given by David Edwards in his minute of 25 June, on which the telegram was based.
3.
We have now examined again the memorandum and draft Bill considered by EXCO on 15 June. Our view remains that, despite the amendment given in your telegram No 699, it is necessary for the Ordinance to be further amended. The reasons for this are given in Fred Burrows' minute of 24 September, a copy of which I attach.
4.
I hope that you will be able to agree to amend the Ordinance on the lines suggested. As you can imagine, we would find neighter of the alternatives referred to in paragraph 7 of Burrow's minute at all attractive.
5.
We
Burrows' minute also refers to the correspondence between Bim Davies and the Chairman of the Hong Kong Branch of Justice. have now looked at the Immigration (Vietnamese Refugee Centres) (Closed Centre) Rules, and conclude that they could give rise to breaches of a number of other Articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. I enclose copies of minutes of 29 and 30 September on this subject by Burrows and Edwards. We fully understand the difficulties which Hong Kong faces over refugees, but I am sure that you in turn will appreciate the problems which will arise if questions are raised in the United Kingdom on the human rights implications of these policies. I should be grateful for your comments.
"
R D Clift
Hong Kong and General Department
CONFIDENTIAL