Jefore
Mr Ricketts
HKD
SECRET
FROM:
RA Burns
DATE:
CC:
31 December 1991
Sir J Coles o/r
COLONIAL LAWS VALIDITY ACT
1. We have had a word about Hong Kong telno 3931 which is a bit of a blockbuster.
2. It is not clear to me how serious a problem we face. The Governor. says that: LegCo can now pass a bill to alter its own Constitution. But we need to be much clearer about what- steps might be open to LegCo which would produce constitutional difficulties. Is there in practice any way they could use their power to alter the executive led nature of the Hong Kong Government or constrain the powers of the Governor? Presumably much of what they might seek to achieve.
to. by changes to the law would simply make formal power refuse to legislate or vote finance which would exist anway, for a
group that held a majority in LegCo. This point needs to bes explored with the Legal Advisers and the Hong Kong Government.
3.
Secondly, we need to look carefully at the telegrams 1987 and check whether this issue was discussed. in later. years eg: within the FCO at the time of the decision to authorise direct elections. Mr Paul (UKREP JLG) may have something to offer. I see that the issue of the Colonial. Laws validity Act first came up in articles in a pro-China: newspaper. Iwonder whether Chinese concern about the pace of democratisation reflects a view that the Act would only come into operation if LegCo had a majority of directly elected laws. Do we have a view on whether such a distinction could be made or does colonial practice elsewhere make that impossible?
?
4. In any case we will need to consider what we would. say to the Chinese about this issue. TE Ministers decided to proceed in the way recommended by the Governor, then it might be possible to win credit with the Chinese by explaining to them how we intended to prevent changes to LegCo's Constitution: for 1997 and the coming into operation of the Basic Law (this could be a point for the Secretary of State- to make with his Chinese opposite number in March)
•
A36AAT
SECRET