imbalance should it prove necessary.
4.
This has already been raised by Mr Rogers of the Hong
Kong Bar Association in his letter of 27 February, to which
Lord Caithness replied on 14 March. Mr Rogers wrote again
C D in reply to Lord Caithness. I have today submitted
B
separately on these further representations from the Hong Kong Barristers enclosing a draft reply supplied by the Hong Kong Government. When the Minister has approved a reply to Mr Rogers, I suggest a copy should be enclosed with the reply to Mr Scrivener.
FABAQC/2
Jihani
J C Morris
Max.