Basic Law or that some form of joint court should be established. This reaction met with little sympathy amongst the Chinese draftsmen. For them, there was no room in a unitary state for a federal type constitutional court; the Basic Law had effect to regulate the relationship of the SAR with the rest of the People's Republic as well as internally in Hong Kong and it was for the existing state organs of the PRC to interpret the Basic Law as they would interpret any other statute of the NPC. To hold that the SAR courts should have exclusive jurisdiction would be to establish their authority not only over the governmental institutions of the SAR but also over the Central Authorities
[26]
As to the argument based on the power of final judgement, that power was a power to render a final judgement in cases in which the court had jurisdiction; it did not confer an unrestricted jurisdiction on the courts
[27]
In the event, the Basic Law article though refined, retained the provisions that the power of interpretation is vested in the Standing Committee, which will consult the Basic Law Committee before giving an interpretation, and that the SAR courts will have power to interpret the Basic Law both in respect of matters within the SAR's autonomy and in matters within the responsiblity of the CPG or concerning relationships between the SAR and the Central Authorities.
In the latter case they must, before giving a judgement which is not appealable, seek an interpretation from the Standing Committee which is binding on the courts. Where this leaves things is unclear. the face of it the Standing Committee is free to give an
16
On