Reference....
HKC 000/1
Rir.
K174
From: Ms J Barrett
Assistant Legal Adviser
270 3381
Date: 6 August 1992
CC: Mr Wye, RAD
32
Mr Bunten HKD
см
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS REPORT OF A MISSION TO HONG KONG
1. You asked for detailed comments on the ICJ report, and on Hong Kong's commentary on it. I regret the time it has taken to produce them.
2.
In general, the Report seems to have been carefully compiled and reasoned and attempts to strike a balance between various points of view. I have not spotted many factual errors of substance. I think that we can agree with a number of the report's findings and recommendations. There are of course many other parts which are at variance with our official line, but the differences are mostly matters of opinion or emphasis. There are comparatively few sections which we can say are definitively wrong. I would suggest that the ICJ merits a detailed substantive response from us, rather than a broad-brush refutation.
3.
HKG's commentary is rather unsatisfactory in that it has been compiled for a variety of potential uses, but fails to make clear which comments are for background and which are for public consumption. I think it would be helpful if our material drew such a distinction, and I have endeavoured to do so in the comments which follow.
CH.III THE MAIN DOCUMENTS
4.
Page 22: Territorial application of the BL
Comment
It is odd that the Decision of the NPC on the Establishment of the Hong Kong SAR defines the area of the SAR as"the Hong Kong Island, the Kowloon Peninsula, and the islands and adjacent waters under its jurisdiction", whereas JD3 refers to 'HK island, Kowloon and the New Territories". There is a similar discrepancy between the Chinese texts of the JD and BL. I agree with the ICJ that the BL is ambiguous, for the reasons stated in the second paragraph on page 22, though I assume that the term "the Kowloon Peninsula" must be intended to include the New Territories. It would be desirable, at some suitable opportunity, to seek confirmation from the Chinese that this is the correct interpretation. Obviously the continuing absence of a map published by the State Council is worrying.
CODE 18-77