1:
تصنف
CCPR/C/SR.855 page 8
29. Under article 40 of the Covenant, the United Kingdom had undertaken to submit reports periodically on measures adopted to give effect to the rights recognized therein and on the progress made in the enjoyment of those rights. He inquired whether arrangements had been made by the United Kingdom Government for the continued performance of that undertaking after 1997.
30. Noting that Mr. Fearn had stated that he had no further information on activities relating to the promotion of greater public awareness of fundamental rights in Hong Kong, he inquired whether the United Kingdom Government was endeavouring to foster such awareness. In particular, he asked whether the rights of the Covenant were taught in schools and universities. Had any measures been taken to inform the people of Hong Kong that the Human Rights Committee would be considering the second periodic report on the territory during the current week in Geneva?
31. Mr. DIMITRIJEVIC, expanding on Mr. Cooray's last question, inquired to what extent people in all United Kingdom independent territories were aware of the Covenant and the rights enshrined therein. Was it translated into the various languages spoken other than English and available in published form? With particular reference to Hong Kong, were translations in Chinese published and freely available? Moreover, he understood that in Hong Kong the teaching of matters of a political nature in secondary schools was discouraged, or even prohibited. If that meant that there was no teaching about the Covenant, that would be contrary to the State party's obligations under the Covenant.
32.
Furthermore, according to article 38 of the draft Basic Law, the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as applied to Hong Kong, were to remain in force. He inquired how that would be done. As the Committee was aware, the People's Republic of China was not a signatory of those Covenants. Was it envisaged that China, even if it did not ratify the Covenant, would be obliged to report to the Committee on the status of the Covenant in Hong Kong after 1997? Moreover, did the words "as applied to Hong Kong" mean that the Covenant would not be fully applicable but only to the extent that it was at present? If so, that would mean that the reservations made by the United Kingdom, with regard to article 25 for example, would remain in force and that the people of Hong Kong would not have the right of direct representation in the legislative organs.
33.
He had gathered from Mr. Fearn's introductory statement that the Covenant was not directly applicable in the dependent territories but was only an aid in clearing up possible ambiguities in constitutional law. He had been informed that in a recent case raising problems under article 19 of the Covenant, which referred to freedom of information, an appeal to a court had been unsuccessful because the court had found that the Covenant was not directly applicable to Hong Kong. That would seem to imply that the guarantee he had quoted under article 38 of the draft Basic Law was of no great value. He therefore inquired what action the United Kingdom Government proposed to take to secure or increase the applicability of the Covenant in Hong Kong so that it would be enforceable to the utmost extent when Hong Kong reverted to China and the acquired rights of the Hong Kong people would not be lost.
34.
Mr. LALLAH welcomed the delegation of the United Kingdom and the resumption of the Committee's dialogue with that country.