ا
Mr Bean Hagber Is not x / dillerent
HKB 243142
RECEIVED IN REGISTRY
19 JAN1990
From: Sir Arthur Watts'
from the conce we received from Mr Edwardspace:
Mr Paul Paul
Hong Kong Department
W14/
14/12
Legal Adser
13 December 1989
(8
Mo Paul
Cc:
I understood that Mr Edwarch and Sir A Watts had concocted
the live we love using. It has not Come across dearly in parliament:
PS
PS/Mr Maude Mr Gillmore Mr McLaren
Mr Colvin, SEAD Mr Brenton, UND Mr Burns, News
Department
Mr Gregson, PRU Mr Edwards
the crisper ling, as argued in para 3, is trus even though simpler. Die
VIETNAMESE BOAT PEOPLE:
INTERNATIONAL LAW
14/12
1. In the Parliamentary Debates over the last 24 hours I have noticed a number of references by Government spokesmen to the effect that the return of the boat people to their State of origin is in accordance with "the custom of international law", being "customary in international law", and similar phrases which somewhat blur the custom/international law concept.
2.
If I might suggest it, I think our position can be covered much more crisply by simply saying that "under international law" States are required to take back those of their citizens who are not acceptable in any other State. Introducing the element of custom sounds a little weaker than is necessary.
3. As background, the relevance of custom in this context is that, broadly speaking, international law is comprised of either of customary law or treaties. The analogy with common law and statute law as the law of the UK is close. The point is that both are equally law. We can say so plainly and simply. If we are to use a reference to the customary element, it should be in the form "customary international law" and not in some other form which can sometimes get closer to suggesting something more like a mere practice or usage, which implies that our legal case is weaker than it is.
SAWABR
Awall
A ́D Watts