CODE 18-77
CONFIDENTIAL
Reference..
Legislative Council on 17.5.67, are adopted the wife of a Chinese customary marriage will have a right to divorce her husband. The White Paper also proposes that, after a date to be appointed, no women may newly acquire any status as a concubine. This would lead to a gradual disappearance of concubinage, which is at present legal in the Colony under Chinese law and custom preserved by the Proclamations referred to above. #
(b) With regard to Article 3 of the ICCPR:
"Equal Rights of Men and Women
"The position of women under Chinese law and custom is inferior to that of men: see the comments against article 3 of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights."
(c) With regard to Article 26 of the ICCPR:
"Racial and other Discrimination
"There is no Hong Kong law which specifically prohibits discrimination against race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
"However, the extent of such discrimination is not significant in Hong Kong."
(File ref: UG 33/23 (26), 1967)
While there is no reference to the New Territories land law question in the comment on Article 26 of the ICCPR, it is possible that some of the wording of the comment on Article 3 of the ICESCR was intended to allude to this question. Be that as it may, there is no indication that any such allusion was recognised by officials in London responsible for considering the information supplied by dependent territories prior to signature of the conventions by the UK.
6.
It may also be worth noting that in the 1966 General Assembly debate on the ICESCR and ICCPR the UK delegation explained HMG's position on the need to include the words "in this respect" at the beginning of the second sentence of Article 26, with the effect of limiting the prohibition of discrimination to the principle of equality before the law. The formulation favoured by the UK was adopted. In voting for the adoption of the two Covenants on 16 December 1966, the UK delegation explained (without any explicit reference to Article 26 of the ICCPR) that certain provisions of the Covenant might cause us difficulty and require further consideration. (File ref: UG 33/8 (3 and 5), 1967).
SO1AAF
CONFIDENTIAL