4
3.3 Draft Bill of Rights
The final version of the Basic Law did not incorporate specifically acceptance of the international monitoring procedures. The Draft Bill of Rights does not provide that the reporting procedures mandated by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights will remain applicable to Hong Kong, either. It is absolutely necessary that these monitoring procedures, which are an integral part of the International Covenants (Articles 28 to 45 of the International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights; Articles 16 to 25 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), remain applicable to Hong Kong if the Covenants are to "remain in force" after 1997 as pledged in the Joint Declaration by the Governments of China and the United Kingdom.
International monitoring is very important because it will help assure the international community and the residents of Hong Kong that the human rights protections in the Draft Bill of Rights and the Covenants are monitored regardless of future changes in government. Under Article 40 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, every State Party is obliged to submit periodic "reports on the measures they have adopted which give effect to the rights recognized [in the Covenant] and on the progress made in the enjoyment of these rights". For example, the United Kingdom's first and second periodic reports to the Human Rights Committee have been accompanied by separate reports concerning the implementation of the Covenant in Hong Kong. As required by Article 40 of the Covenant, reports by States Parties are examined by the Human Rights Committee, composed of 18 experts elected by States Parties to serve in their personal capacities. In conducting its examination of a state report, the Committee invites representatives of that state to appear before it. Committee members seek an open and constructive dialogue with the state representatives about achievements in giving effect to the rights in the Covenant, as well as difficulties in implementing the Covenant and how they might be overcome.
While Amnesty International considers it important that the provisions of the Covenants be fully incorporated into domestic legislation, such incorporation is not a substitute for the mandatory system of international supervision set forth in the Covenants.
4. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND SUBSEQUENT LAWS
The Draft Bill of Rights provides in Part I, Clause 4 (1): "Every enactment subsequent to the commencement of this Ordinance shall, to the extent that it admits of such a construction, be construed as being subject to the Ordinance". The Commentary to the Draft Bill of Rights explains the import of the alternative: "If a provision in such a law can only be given a meaning which restricts the rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, Clause 4 will not prevent that provision from operating". The Commentary to the Draft Bill of Rights proposes a solution to this problem, that is, to include a provision in subsequent enactments that requires them to be subject to the Bill of Rights. Amnesty International considers that there must be some means of ensuring that subsequent enactments do not infringe the fundamental human rights protections in the Bill of Rights.