CCPR/C/SR.855 page 12
into account the limitation clause in article 39. The disturbing feature of that clause was that it imposed a limitation not merely on specific human rights provisions, but on all human rights enshrined in the draft Basic Law. He would welcome comments on that point.
53.
Mr. POCAR said that his colleagues had already raised all the issues on which he would have wished to comment in connection with the constitutional and legal framework within which the Covenant was implemented, and he particularly endorsed the views expressed by Mr. Cooray, Mr. Dimitrijevic and Mr. Mavrommatis. The only additional point he wished to make concerned the need for individuals in dependent territories to know what their rights were under the Covenant. He referred in particular to the publicity given to the co-operation of the State party with the Human Rights Committee. When the Committee had considered the second periodic report of the United Kingdom in March 1985, it had been told that the dialogue had been publicized through the media in the United Kingdom. He wondered whether that would also happen in the dependent territories and in particular whether the United Kingdom authorities would do anything in Hong Kong to publicize the discussion of the present report in the Committee.
54.
Mr. WENNERGREN also associated himself with the comments made by other colleagues. Referring to the United Kingdom representative's remark in his introductory statement that the Covenant was not part of domestic law in the dependent territories, he inquired how active the United Kingdom Government was in promoting the Covenant and ensuring that all its principles were incorporated in domestic law in the dependent territories.
55.
So far as Hong Kong was concerned, the 1984 Joint Declaration stated that the laws currently in force would remain basically unchanged. He wondered how that would affect common law. Moreover, article 38 of the draft Basic Law indicated that the provisions of the International Covenants should be implemented through legislation by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. However, it was not clear how the legislature of the Special Administrative Region would function, and he therefore thought that it would be wise to incorporate certain provisions in the current laws before 1997, so that the legislature would not be overwhelmed by the volume of necessary legislation.
56. It had been stated that the United Kingdom Government examined the laws enacted by the legislative bodies of the dependant territories so as to ensure that they complied with the Covenant. There was a Film Censorship Bill in Hong Kong which stated that the censor should take account of article 19 of the Covenant. However, to take something into account was not the same as to comply with it, and he wondered whether in specific cases the United Kingdom Government might intervene and inform the Hong Kong administrative authorities that they were not acting in accordance with their obligations under the Covenant.
¥
X
3
MA
€
La
The meeting rose at 12.55 p.m.