16
1407
Hong Kong: Democracy After 1997
it
[29 JANUARY 1992] Hong Kong: Democracy After 1997
4
1408
pt the doctrine of collective responsibility, as he rate of democratisation. The aim should be to agree thought his party was rather stronger in LEGCO than alterations with China in advance on a subject such as an elected party.
this. This is the only way we can be sure that the Legislative Council elected in 1995 will be able to continue in office through 1997 to 1999. If we increased the number of directly-elected seats unilaterally, the Chinese would certainly regard the resulting LEGCO as incompatible with the Basic Law. In all likelihood they would not therefore allow it to continue after 1997.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, what one has to understand is there is no government party in Hong Kong. That decision was entirely for Martin Lee to make and he made it.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, I did not say anything about the Executive. I did not say anything about who should be elected or about whether or not Martin Lee should be nominated. I hope the noble Earl will withdraw the accusation he made that I am ill-informed on this matter.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, I am most happy to withdraw that accusation. I apologise to the noble Lord if I misunderstood his speech. I shall read his speech with great care when it is printed in the Official Report, as I normally do.
I know the Hong Kong Government want to work closely with all those in LEGCO, and I hope all those in LEGCO want to work closely with the Hong Kong Government. The election marked a significant step forward as the noble Lord, Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos, remarked-in the development of demo- cracy in Hong Kong. It implemented stage one of the process agreed by Britain, China and the Hong Kong Government. LEGCO now has almost one-third of its members elected by universal suffrage and, for the first time, a majority of the Council consists of elected rather than appointed members. We are well on the way to transforming LEGCO from a wholly appointed body in 1984 to a body after 1997 which, in the words of the Joint Declaration, will
be "constituted by elections". That is the strategy, based on the Joint Declaration, that aims to ensure a smooth transition. That is the strategy the noble Lord, Lord Ennals, wants to tear asunder. I must ask the noble Lord what continuity he has proposed for the people of Hong Kong. He has proposed no such continuity.
I know that the noble Lord, Lord Wyatt, takes a personal interest in this important matter of democracy. Our aim is not only to establish in the territory before 1997 a system of government which includes a substantial element of elected democracy but also one that will endure and develop further after 1997. Present arrangements provide for steady progress towards the possibility of eventual full direct elections in line with the Basic Law. As a result of our earlier representations to the Chinese authorities, the Basic Law provides for a progressive increase in directly-elected seats from 20 in 1995, rising to 24 directly-elected seats in 1999 and 30 in 2003, with the option of full direct elections in 2007. In October last year the Hong Kong Government announced a comprehensive review of the electoral legislation and arrangements.
The aim of the review is to examine issues and problems that emerged from the experience of the 1991 elections. The review will be completed in 1992. We shall, in due course, be discussing with the Chinese the arrangements for the next LEGCO elections in 1995 and will continue to press the case for a faster
711 LD25/53 Job 8-7
i
Lord Ennals: My Lords, I shall have to ask the noble Earl to give way again. He accused me of having advocated the tearing up of agreements already reached. If he reads my speech carefully he will see that I made no such suggestion. He has just used the words "only changed by agreement". I agree with that absolutely. The noble Earl ought not to be making accusations which are not based on fact.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, I shall read the noble Lord's speech in the Official Report. I gained the impression that he did not like the present arrangement and that he was quite happy to tear up those arrangements without putting anything in their place which was not agreed with China. If I am wrong, I am delighted. The noble Lord may have made a slightly different speech from the one I understood him to have made. I certainly interpreted it differently.
The democratic freedoms referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Wyatt, go beyond the question of elections, important though that is. The Joint Declaration expressly provides for Hong Kong's present capitalist and democratic way of life, with all its human rights and freedoms, laws and legal system, to continue for at least 50 years after Hong Kong reverts to Chinese sovereignty. Like the noble Lord, Lord MacLehose of Beoch, I was pleased, incident- ally, to see press reports over the weekend quoting Mr. Deng Xiaoping as saying that that guarantee will remain the same for 100 years.
There are many aspects to democratic freedom besides the freedom to vote: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment and freedom from mental or physical ill-treatment, to name just a few of the basic ones. Those have been a feature of life in Hong Kong in the past and under the one country, two system approach set out in the Joint Declaration will continue to be so.
In addition, with our support. the Hong Kong Government have introduced a Bill of Rights which became law on 8th June last year. It reinforces protection of the rights of individual citizens. It gives effect in local law to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as applied in Hong Kong and makes it justiciable in Hong Kong courts. To ensure consistency some local legislation will need to be amended to a limited degree. The Chinese have expressed reservations about the Bill but we have ensured that it is compatible with the Basic Law.
As so many of your Lordships have said, the judiciary has an important role to play in protecting those rights. The Joint Declaration provided that a Court of Final Appeal, to replace the jurisdiction for Hong Kong of the Privy Council after 1997, should be