fluous, because a person who takes part in such an assembly can be

-18-

prosecuted for taking part in an unlawful assembly. Consequently,
clauces 17 and 18 seek to repeal sections 28 und 30.

16.

The effect of the amendent to section 31 of the principal Ordi-

nance, contained in clause 19, is to require the Commissioner of Police

to serve notice of cancellation of a curfew permit on the permittee.

17.

Section 32 enables a person charged witlı carrying an offensive

weapon durin: a curfew to put up the defence that he had a reasonable

excuse for so doing. This adds to the existing defence of lawful

authority. (Clause 20).

18.

Clauses 21, 22 and 23 amend Part VII of the principal Ordinance,

which deals with closed areas. In future a closed area order made under

section 35 must be published in the Gazette although the order will be

effective from the day on which it is made. The proposed subsection (3)

of section 36 deals with the closing of closed areas by the erection of

barriers or other means, The new subsection (2) of section 37 provides

for the issuing of permits to enter non-military closed areas by the

Commissioner of Police or by such other authority or person as is autho-

rized for that purpose in the closed area order. By the new section
37(4),

notice of cancellation of a permit must be given. The powers of arrest

contained in subsection (1) of section 39 are extended to enable a ¿vard

(defined in the new subsection (4)) to arrest any person about to commit

any offence within a closed area. The definition of "guard" will ensure

that, in an emergency, closed areas may be guarded by persons other than

police officers and members of the armed forces.

19.

Section 40 is amended so as to empower the Governor to autho-

rize the Commissioner of Police to appoint, in writing, any person as a

special constable. (Clause 24).

20

Clause 25 makes a number of minor drafting amendments to

section 4.

www

- 19.

21.

Section 449 of the crincipal Criinanco is repealed by clause 26,

This conferred unusually vide povers of search and entry on police

officers and it is now considered that the powers conferred by the

Police Force Ordinance and at cermon law should prove sufficient. It

is replaced by a coction in auch narrower terms, empowering membera of

Her Majesty's forces and police officers, in specified circumstances,

to require a person to identify himself.

22.

Clause 27 adds a new section 50A, which makes it an offence

for a person to obstruct a member of Her Majesty's forces, a member of

the Royal Hong Kong Defence Force or any other person acting under a

power or duty conferred or imposed on them by the Ordinance. In Hong

Kong, military personnel in times of disturbance work in conjunction

with the police and it is considered desirable that they should have a

measure of protection from obstruction.

23.

Ordinance.

Clause 28 makes a consequential amendment to the City Hall

Attorney General.

Reference..

30

Mr. Rushford

You may wish to refer this file to Sir Arthur Grattan-Bellew who has
previously dealt with it.

2.

In January of this year Hong Kong sent us a draft bill to amend their
Public Order Ordinance. The bill was designed to meet various criticisms
which had been levelled at the principal ordinance by "Justice". The
bill went a long way towards meeting those criticisms, but after
studying it we went back to Hong Kong in May with certain queries (ace
saving despatch at (22) When Sir Leslie Konson visited Hong Kong in
October he discussed the matter with the Governor and the latter's
advisors: it is clear from Sir Leslie's note at the end of the brief at
28 that Hong Kong were ready to meet all the points that we had raised.

3. le hr.ve now received the further draft bill enclosed with the Hong
Kong saving despatch at (29 From a study of this bill it appears to me
that Hong Kong have, in fact, virtually met us on all points. For ease
of reference I attach front cover, a copy of the principal ordinence and
a copy of the carlier draft bill.

at

4. The only particular points to which I would invite attention are as
follows:-

5.

(a)

I have underlined in pencil on the revised draft bill behind (29)
passages which are new. They appear to be unobjectionable.

(b) Clause 26 of the revised bill repeals and replaces section 4 of the
principal ordinance. The background to this amendment is set out in (25)
on HK 14/20 attached.

(c) Clause 28 of the revised bill provides for a consequential amendment
to the City Hall Ordinance. This had previously been

mentioned.

not

Subject to your views I think that we can now tell Hong Kong that so far
ar we are concerned their rvised bill is acceptable. We cannot of course
foretell what further points may be raised in Hong Kong by the Bar
Association, the Law Society or the

Hong Kong Branch of Justice, to all of whom a copy

of the bill has been sent for comment.

Mr. Gaminara

(A. W. Gaminara)

21 November, 1969.

Ir gamma wishford, the he went on leave, asked

Mr. Ruckford,

me to deal with than

papus.

Jagree the reused Billis aceptable, 26/49 ad frattar Bellur

Foreign and Commonwealth Office London S.W.1

CONFIDENTIAL

SAVING DESPATCH

HKK 14/15

From the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth

To the Governor, HONG KONG

28 November, 1969

No. 532

Affairs

Your Saving Despatch No. 1262.

Public Order Ordinance

I am most grateful for the action taken in your

revised draft Bill to meet the points raised in my

Saving Despatch No. 208.

2/12

LAST

REF.

(29)

NEAT

RCF.

In request to 200 the file when it retumed to Regustin

2

31

171

Registry No. HKK 14/15

DEPARTMENT

Hong Kong

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

Date and time (G.M.T.) telegram should

reach addressee(s)

PRIORITY MARKINGS

(Date)

Despatched

Ty=kxcret

Blach

Secret

Immediate

Confidential

Restricted

Reusing

Kloclassified

784

CYPHER

Security classification -if any

D

PRIVACY MARKING

[Secu

In-Confidence

En-Clair.

Code-

Cyther

[

Privacy marking -if any

]

CONFIDENTIAL

....

у

Bay

16

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

ACTING GOVERNO.

KONG

.........ILALLLLL

(date)

Draft Telegram to:- Acting Governor Hong Kong

No

[Codeword-if any]

Addressed to

telegram .............

766

And to

(Date).../12 repeated for information to

And to:-

Saving to

HATA HAIHAATHINAIKINAIAAAI

Repeat to:-

Following Parliamentary Question by John Rankin

is for oral reply on 8 December.

"To ask the Secretary of State what consultations

he has had with the Government of Hong Kong in order to

increase the rights of public assembly."

Saving to:-

2.

Distribution:--

files

Copies to:-

HKD

Parliamentary Off Mr. Godden

In the light of your Saving Despatch No. 1262 we

are proposing to submit reply along following lines:

"As a result of consultations that I have had

with the Governor, a draft Bill to amend the Public

Order Ordinance has been prepared and has been referred

to certain interested bodies in Hong Kong. The Bill is

designed to ameliorate certain provisions of the

Ordinance in their application to public assemblies."

3. Since draft Bill has been referred to organisations

mentioned in your Saving Despatch it would be difficult

in replying to supplementaries to refuse to disclose

any of the Bill's contents. Would you see any

objection to such disclosure if this were sought and,

M

(11516) Dd.3192077 300m 10/68 G.W.D.Ltd Cip 863

if not, suggest extent to which such information might

be given?

4.

Grateful to learn earliest whether you agree with

suggested lines of reply and for any material which

might be useful for supplementaries. It would also be

helpful if you could give us some indication of date

when Bill is likely to be introduced in Legislature.

2.12.69.

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN

4

1

J

CYPHER/CAT A

CONFIDENTIAL

IMMEDIATE FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE TELEGRAM NUMBER 766

CONFIDENTIAL

100 COPY

TO HONG KONG

2 DECEMBER 1969 (HKK 14/15)

32)

ULLOWING PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION BY JOHN RANKIN IS FOR ORAL REPLY

ON 8 DECEMBER.

• TO ASK THE SECRETARY OF STATE WHAT CONSULTATIONS HE HAS
HAD WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF HONG KONG IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE RIGHTS OF
PUBLIC ASSEMBLY,"

2. IN THE LIGHT OF YOUR SAVING DESPATCH NO. 1262 WE ARE PROPOSING TO
SUBMIT REPLY ALONG FOLLOWING LINES :

AS A RESULT OF CONSULTATIONS THAT I HAVE HAD WITH THE
GOVERNOR, A DRAFT BILL TO AMEND THE PUBLIC ORDER ORDINANCE HAS BEEN
PREPARED AND HAS BEEN REFERRED TO CERTAIN INTERESTED BODIES IN HONG
KONG. THE BILL IS DESIGNED TO AMELIORATE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE
ORDINANCE IN THEIR APPLICATION TO PUBLIC ASSEMBLIES.'*

3. SINCE DRAFT BILL HAS BEEN REFERRED TO ORGANISATIONS MENTIONED ##
YOUR SAVING DESPATCH IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT IN REPLYING TO
SUPPLEMENTARIES TO REFUSE TO DISCLOSE ANY OF THE BILL'S CONTENTS. WOULD
YOU SEE ANY OBJECTION TO SUCH DISCLOSURE IF THIS WERE SOUGHT AND IF NOT,
SUGGEST EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH INFORMATION MIGHT BE

GIVEN ?

4. GRATEFUL TO LEARN EARLIEST WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH SUGGESTED LINES
OF REPLY AND FOR ANY MATERIAL WHICH MIGHT BE USEFUL FOR SUPPLEMENT-
ARIES. IF WOULD ALSO BE HELPFUL IF YOU COULD GIVE US SOME INDICATION

OF DATE WHEN BILL IS LIKELY TO BE INTRODUCED IN LEGISLATURE,

STEWART

FILES

HONG KONG DEPT PARLIAMENTARY UNIT

P.S. TO LORD SHEPHERD

1

33

CONFIDENTIAL

CYPHER/CAT A

IMMEDIATE HONG KONG

TELEGRAM NO. 897

CONFIDENTIAL

TO FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE

4 DECEMBER 1969

1.

CONFIDENTIAL

32)

ADDRESSED FCO TELNO. 897 OF 4TH DECEMBER.

YOUR TELEGRAM NO. 766.

PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION.

RECEIVED IN REGISTRY No. 51

4. DEC 1969

HICK 14/15

ALTHOUGH THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THIS IT WOULD PERHAPS BE PRUDENT

TO ASSUME THAT RANKIN MAY HAVE A COPY OF THE DRAFT BILL IN HIS

POSSESSION, AND SUPPLEMENTARIES MAY THEREFORE RELATE TO SPECIFIC

PROVISIONS MADE OR NOT MADE IN THE BILL.

2. IF YOU AGREE, I SHOULD PREFER THE REPLY TO BE ON SLIGHTLY

MORE FORTHCOMING LINES, AND SUGGEST THE FOLLOWING FOR CONSIDER-

I

ATION:-

THE GOVERNOR HAS HAD UNDER REVIEW VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE PUBLIC

ORDER ORDINANCE, INCLUDING THOSE WHICH REGULATE PUBLIC MEETINGS,

PROCESSIONS AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY. THE REVIEW WAS INITIATED TO

TAKE ACCOUNT OF COMMENTS ON THE ORDINANCE MADE BY VARIOUS INTERESTED

PARTIES IN HONG KONG, AND I HAVE BEEN CONSULTED DURING THE REVIEW
PROCESS. A DRAFT BILL HAS BEEN PREPARED WITH THE PURPOSE OF

CLARIFYING SOME PROVISIONS IN THE PUBLIC ORDER ORDINANCE ABOUT

WHICH DOUBT HAD BEEN EXPRESSED AND OF RELAXING OTHERS IN ORDER

TO GIVE BETTER PROTECTION TO THE PUBLIC AGAINST ANY MISUSE OF

POWERS OR AGAINST THE POSSIBLE CONVICTION OF PERSONS INNOCENTLY

INVOLVED IN CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH CONSTITUTE OFFENCES UNDER THE

ORDINANCE. THE BILL HAS BEEN REFERRED FOR-COMMENT BY CERTAIN

INTERESTED BODIES IN HONG KONG. WHEN THEIR COMMENTS HAVE BEEN

RECEIVED AND CONSIDERED THE USUAL PROCESS OF PUBLICATION OF THE

/BILL

CONFIDENTIAL

CONFIDENTIAL

-2-

BILL FOR GENERAL INFORMATION WILL TAKE PLACE BEFORE IT IS

INTRODUCED INTO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.

3.

YOU WILL BE AWARE OF THE RELATIVELY COMPLEX PROVISIONS OF THE

BILL AND OF THE ORDINANCE THAT IT SEEKS TO AMEND, AND YOU MAY

AGREE THAT IT WOULD THEREFORE BE PREFERABLE TO AVOID AS FAR AS

POSSIBLE VOLUNTEERING INFORMATION ON THE DETAILED CONTENT OF

THE BILL, IN ORDER TO AVOID THE RISK THAT AN ORAL REPLY ON

LEGAL PROVISIONS OF SOME COMPLEXITY AND DELICACY MAY BE MISUNDER-

STOOD OR INCORRECTLY TRANSMITTED TO THIRD PARTIES. IT MAY'

THEREFORE BE ADVISABLE TO ASK FOR NOTICE OF DETAILED POINTS

RAISED IN SUPPLEMENTARIES THOUGH I CAN SEE NO OBJECTION TO YOUR

CONFIRNING, IF ASKED, THAT THE REQUIREMENT CONCERNING LICENSING

OF MEETINGS REMAINS, BUT THAT THE DRAFT, IF APPROVED, WILL HAVE

THE RESULT OF EXCLUDING CERTAIN MEETINGS, FOR EXAMPLE, FUNERAL

MEETINGS OR MEETINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CARRYING OUT DUTIES OR

POWERS CONFERRED BY ANY ORDINANCE (SUCH AS CREDITORS MEETINGS)

SEMI COLON ALSO THAT IN A HUMBER OF CASES SPECIFIC PROVISION

WILL BE MADE TO INTRODUCE THE DEFENCE OF LAWFUL AUTHORITY OR

REASONABLE EXCUSE, SO AS TO AFFORD PROTECTION TO PEOPLE UNINTENT-

IONALLY OR INNOCENTLY INVOLVED IN OFFENCES ASSOCIATED WITH

UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLIES,

IF YOU ARE ASKED TO IDENTIFY THE BODIES TO WHOM THE DRAFT BILL

HAS BEEN REFERRED YOU MAY FEEL THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO DISCLOSE

THIS INFORMATION, THOUGH I SHOULD PREFER IF YOU DID NOT VOLUNTEER

THE INFORMATION, SINCE THIS IS MERELY LIKELY TO RESULT HERE IN

THEIR BEING ASKED PREMATURELY BY THE PRESS TO COMMENT PUBLICLY

ON A BILL THAT HAS NOT YET BEEN PUBLISHED. IF THE QUESTION IS

CONFIDENTIAL

/RAISED

CONFIDENTIAL

HONG KONG TELEGRAM NO. 897 TO FCO

-30

RAISED AND HAS TO BE ANSWERED, I HOPE THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE

TO EMPHASISE THAT CONSULTATION WITH THESE BODIES IS BUT A

PRELIMINARY TO PUBLICATION FOR GENERAL INFORMATION AND TAKES

ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT IT WAS THESE BODIES THAT MADE SPECIFIC

AND DETAILED CRITICISMS OF THE PRESENT ORDINANCE, SO THAT IT IS

PROPER THAT THEY SHOULD FIRST BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO

COMMENT ON THE BILL.

5. IF THE MORE GENERAL POINT IS TAKEN THAT THE LICENSING PROVIS-

IONS SHOULD BE ABOLISHED ALTOGETHER I SUGGEST THAT YOU SHOULD

REPLY TO THE EFFECT THAT NO RESPONSIBLE BODY IN HONG KONG HAS

CEVIED THE NEED FOR SUCH PROVISIONS, REASONABLY DEFINED, AND THAT,

IN VIEW OF THE EVENTS OF 1967, IT IS CERTAIN THAT PUBLIC OPINION

IN HONG KONG WOULD OPPOSE ABOLITION.

I CANNOT INDICATE A DATE FOR INTRODUCTION OF THE BILL INTO

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. THERE HAS SO FAR BEEN NO RESPONSE FROM THE

BODIES TO WHOM THE BILL WAS REFERRED, AND THEY MUST CLEARLY BE

ALLOWED SUFFICIENT TIME TO FORMULATE THEIR VIEWS. THERE IS NO

INDICATION WHATEVER OF PUBLIC INTEREST HERE IN THIS MATTER AT

THE PRESENT TIME.

SIR H. NORMAN WALKER

FILES

H.K.D.

PARL. UNIT

P.S. TO LORD SHEPHERD

CONFIDENTIAL

*La./Co.

Mr. John Rankin (Glasgow, Govan): To ask the Secretary of State for
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what consultations he has had with the
Government of Hong Kong in order to increase the rights of public
assembly.

8th December 1969

I have been consulted by the Governor in the

preparation of a draft Bill to amend the Public

Order Ordinance.

One of the purposes of the Bill

is to ameliorate some provisions of the Ordinance

relating to the rights of public assembly.

Hi Merth

Thy Rest the bereit pl. A 9/19

вебастре

K.I.V. receipt of enacted Ordinance for

desallowwer ((29) refers).

B.u. one

ARG

5,12,69.

पति

now

1

46

الغذا

REFERENCES

A | A. Hansard Commons 5 December, 1967, Column 249

B. Hansard Commons, 12 December, 1967, Columns 178-179

Hansard Commons, 19 December, 1968, Column 451 W

Hansard Commons, 10 February, 1969, Column 880

Flag B

Flag C

C.

Flag D

D.

NOTES FOR SUPPLEMENTARIES

Licensing of Public Meetings and Processions

1. The Bill does not envisage any change in the present

requirement that, with certain exceptions, a licence must

be obtained for the holding of a public meeting or procession,

No responsible body in Hong Kong has denied the need for this

requirement.

2. Under the Ordinance public meetings held exclusively for

religious purposes or in a licensed place of public

entertainment do not require a licence. The Bill will extend

this exemption, for example to any public meeting held

exclusively for social purposes in any licensed restaurant

or solely for the purpose of a funeral.

3.

There is a right of appeal to the Governor against any

refusal to issue a licence or against the conditions attached

to such licence.

Ameliorating Provisions of the Bill

4. The Bill reduces the discretion conferred by the

Ordinance on police officers in the exercise of their powers

to stop or disperse public meetings or processions.

/ 5.

10

5.

It seeks to safeguard the position of innocent bystanders

who may unintentionally become involved in circumstances

constituting an offence.

Consultation with interested bodies

6. The Bill has been referred to certain interested bodies

in Hong Kong, for their comments before it is published for

general information. These are bodies which have made

detailed criticisms of the Ordinance.

7.

To be used only if pressed? The bodies concerned are

the Hong Kong Bar Association, the Law Society of Hong Kong

and the Hong Kong Branch of Justice.

Date of Publication of Bill

8. I cannot indicate a date for publication.

The bodies

to which the Bill has been referred will need time to present

their views.

Need for powers to control public meetings and processions

9. In Hong Kong's densely crowded conditions, large crowds

can gather very quickly and the activities of trouble-makers

can lead without warning to widespread disturbances. It is

necessary to be able to exercise control over public meetings

and processions at all times. The Ordinance is designed to

meet this need on a permanent basis.

Emergency Legislation

10. There is no emergency legislation in force relating to

public assemblies.

Reply to Supplementaries requesting detailed information on

public assembly or other provisions of the Bill

11. The draft Bill is a complex one and in order to avoid

any possible misunderstanding in these short exchanges I

would ask the hon. Member to await its publication.

:

33

Oral Answers

34

kind, with reasonable opportunity for people to gather together in this
British dependency to enjoy a little British liberty?

Oral Answers

8 DECEMBER 1969

representations from the ambassador of the United Arab Republic on the
subject. Her Majesty's Government recognise that the Sinai Peninsula and
its terri- torial waters are under the sovereignty of the United Arab
Republic, even though at present military forces of Israel are in
occupation and control of the peninsula.

Sir Dingle Foot: I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree
that long-term projects of this sort initiated in occupied territory
have the most serious implications, tending to show that the Israeli
Government have no intention of complying with the United Nations
resolution and leaving the occupied territory? Will he make clear that
the British Government do not aprove of any form of participation by a
British firm in projects such as these?

Mr. Luard: I agree with my right hon. and learned Friend that such a
develop ment does have serious implications. I have already told him
that we are look- As ing into the matter for this reason. regards the
legal rights and wrongs, my right hon. and learned Friend probably knows
that this matter either is already or may shortly be the subject of
legal proceedings. For that reason, I imagine that he will not expect me
to comment at this time on the legal rights and wrongs.

Hong Kong

(Rights of Public Assembly)

46. Mr. Rankin asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth
Affairs what consultations he has had with the Government of Hong Kong
in order to increase the rights of public assembly.

Mr. Luard: We have been consulted by the Governor in the preparation of
a draft Bill to amend the Public Order Ordinance. One of the purposes of
the Bill is to ameliorate some provisions of the Ordinance relating to
the rights of public assembly.

Mr. Rankin: Is my hon. Friend aware that that is quite good news? Can he
say whether the discussions will reach a stage when we can say that
three people are no longer a crowd and four have ceased to be a mass
demonstration? Can we look forward to a situation of that

7 D 75

Mr. Luard: I have already told my hon. Friend that the provisions of the
new Ordinance will in many ways improve the existing situation. It is
designed to give better protection for the public against any misuse of
powers or possible conviction of persons innocently involved in a
situation which constitutes an offence under the Ordinance.

South Africa (Mr. Philip Golding)

50. Mr. Peter M. Jackson asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and
Com- monwealth Affairs whether he will instruct the new British
Ambassador to South Africa to make further representations to the Union
Government on behalf of Mr. Philip Golding.

Mr. Luard: Representations have been made on behalf of Mr. Golding by my
right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary to Dr. Muller on two occasions.
The South African authorities have now said that Mr. Golding will be
released after giving evidence at the trial which is taking place in
Pretoria.

Mr. Jackson: While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask,
never- theless, whether he has had his attention drawn to the statement
by Chief Justice Bekker on 1st December, that Mr. Golding would be
released if his evidence were satisfactory? In other words, this young
man is placed in an impossible position. If he gives evidence for the
Crown he will be released. He is therefore intimi- dated. My second
question to my hon. Friend is to ask him whether, in view of the
comments recently made by Sir John Nicholls, our retiring Ambassador, he
is entirely satisfied on the nature of the representations which have
come from the Embassy?

Mr. Luard: My attention has not been drawn to the first point which my
hon. Friend referred to, and I will certainly look into it. As to his
second point, we have had no evidence that there is any dissatisfaction
with the representations which have been made on behalf of Mr. Golding.

(14)

¡

DATE & DEC 69.

CCL.

VOL

33-34

793

fot

Q&A sent

A. Wry Hang

11/1

wril (34

Mr. Carter

certer

Mr. Wikordi

132 4/12

Parliamentary Office

tor orrice

The attached Question by Mr. Rankin relates to the Hong Kong Public
Order Ordinance which inter alia includes provisions for the control of
public meetings and processions. As indicated in paragraph 3 below, Mr.
Rankin has shown a previous interest in this legislation. Since the
legislation

Share This Page