CONFIDENTIAL
242
152037
MDHOAN 2517
CONFIDENTIAL
FM FCO
HKD241
KP
2 JUL 1990
Q DIST?
TOP COPY
да вигора
f41717
TO DESKBY 17010OZ HONG KONG
TELNO 1354
OF 16170OZ JULY 90
INFO IMMEDIATE PEKING, UKREP JLG HONG KONG
YOUR TELNO 2219: BILL OF RIGHTS
WE WELCOME THE DECISION REPORTED IN PARAGRAPH 2(A) OF TUR
AND NOTE YOUR INTENTIONS IN PARAS 2(B) AND (C).
1.
2. ON PARA 2 (D), WE SYMPATHISE WITH YOUR APPROACH BUT IT IS DIFFICULT TO COMMENT WITHOUT SEEING THE EXCO MEMORANDUM (YOUR FAX HAD NOT REACHED DESKS BY 1800 LOCAL TIME).
3.
ON PARA 2(E), OUR USUAL PROCEDURE WHEN EXTENDING INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS TO DEPENDENT TERRITORIES IS, AS YOU KNOW, TO ASK THE DT CONCERNED WHETHER LOCAL LEGISLATION IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CONVENTION. WE WOULD RARELY CHECK THE LEGISLATION OURSELVES. WE WOULD NEED TO CHECK OUR 1976 FILES TO BE SURE, BUT WE IMAGINE THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PROCEDURE FOLLOWED IN 1976. SIMILARLY, WE WOULD NEED TO CHECK OUR 1984 FILES TO SEE HOW FAR THIS ASPECT WAS CONSIDERED AT THE TIME. WE DO NOT EXPECT THAT WE GAVE IT DETAILED CONSIDERATION. YOUR LINE TO TAKE WITH EXCO WILL THEREFORE HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO STATING HKG'S POSITION. WE ASSUME YOUR EXCO MEMORANDUM ADDRESSES EXCO'S REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
BILL OF RIGHTS AND THE JD AND FOR A DRAFT PUBLIC STATEMENT.
4. IN FUTURE, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD SEND FAXES CONCERNING THE BILL OF RIGHTS MARKED URGENT (IF APPROPRIATE) TO MAJOR, HKD.
KURD
YYYY
PAGE 1 CONFIDENTIAL