CONFIDENTIAL
HKC 175/1
10
001410
MDLOAN 0524
CONFIDENTIAL
FM FCO
TO PRIORITY HONG KONG
TELNO 514
TOP COPY
ст
Q DIST?
OF 17153OZ MARCH 92
INFO PRIORITY PEKING, UKREP JLG HONG KONG
pa.
YOUR TELNOS 387 AND 388: MARITIME TERRORISM CONVENTION
1 THE UK RATIFIED THIS CONVENTION IN RESPECT OF THE UK ONLY ON 3 MAY 1991. NO DECLARATION WAS MADE AS TO WHAT WAS A
·
''COMPETENT AUTHORITY''. THE SECOND TUR PARAGRAPH 2
REFERS TO THE COMPROMISE PROPOSAL THAT HONG KONG BE IDENTIFIED AS AN ''APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY IN A DECLARATION SENT TO THE DEPOSITORY, THIS NOT THE LANGUAGE OF THE CONVENTION. AN ALTERNATIVE MIGHT BE TO STATE THAT ''THE AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARTICLE 10 IN RESPECT OF OPEN SQUARE BRACKETS HONG KONG CLOSE SQUARE BRACKETS IS ...'' HONG KONG ITSELF CANNOT BE IDENTIFIED AS AN ''APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY''. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE HONG KONG GOVERN -MENT WOULD HAVE TO BE NAMED AS THE AUTHORITY. IF YOU CONSIDER THAT THERE ARE ANY OTHER ARTICLES APART FROM ARTICLE 10 WHICH NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DECLARATION, THESE COULD BE ADDED TO THIS WORDING.
2.
ANOTHER, LESS GOOD SOLUTION, WOULD BE FOR NO DECLARATION TO BE MADE AT ALL WHEN THIS CONVENTION IS APPLIED TO HONG KONG. THE QUESTION OF WHAT WOULD BE THE HONG KONG AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARTICLE 10 WOULD MERELY BE AGREED WITH THE CHINESE. BUT THE MAKING OF A DECLARATION WOULD PUT HONG KONG'S POSITION ON A MORE SECURE FOOTING VIZ A VIZ THE CHINESE.
3.
WE APOLOGISE FOR THE DELAY IN REPLYING TO TURS, AND WOULD BE GRATEFUL FOR YOUR VIEWS.
HURD
YYYY
PAGE 1 CONFIDENTIAL