INUSA
CONFIDENTIAL
MKB 012 16
- From:
Paul Fifoot
Legal Advisers
O & AUG 1990
Date:
27 June 1990
70
Mr Stone, HKD
CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE:
ROYAL INSTRUCTIONS
1.
AMENDMENTS TO THE LETTERS PATENT AND
(60
Your minute of 21 June raised the question of reserved legislative powers of the Governor and the Colonial Laws Validity Act.
2. I have set out in a separate minute, of which I enclose a copy, the issues that arise as regards the reserved powers of the Governor. The purpose of giving him such powers is to ensure that he is not powerless, and possibly penniless, in the face of an attack by a hostile Legislative Council.
3.
The Colonial Laws Validity Act point is very different in nature and in quality. I have had it on my checklist ever since the issue was raised in 1987 or so. The Governor can always refuse to enact a bill for the alteration of the composition of the Legislature as contemplated by that Act. The only issues are whether it is more desirable to remove temptation, thus depriving LegCo of the opportunity of forcing a veto on the Governor, and whether there is a Chinese expectation of our doing something about the Act. Mr Wye's minute of 12 March 1990 is some evidence that although we thought of raising and assuaging Chinese doubts on the matter we did not do so. If we can rely upon our records well and good, but one would be apprehensive of the Chinese being in a position to say that we had not got rid of the problem that we had said we would get rid of.
4. If there is a reluctance to tackle this point now, it does not necessarily prevent us from doing so if the Chinese raise the point. The amendment of the Colonial Laws Validity Act would not be made in the Letters Patent (though provision for reserving an Ordinance varying the composition of the Council could be included in the Royal Instructions) but in a separate Order in Council under the Hong Kong Act 1985.
of
P Fifoot
2PFABJ
CONFIDENTIAL
69