12
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 1990
DR LEONG REGARDED THE LEGAL SAFEGUARDS CONTAINED AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS IN THE BASIC LAW AS THE SAME COIN".
BILL THE
BILL
IN THE "TWO SIDES OF
SHOULD BE VIEWED AS AN HE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT ELABORATION OF THE ARTICLES IN CHAPTER THREE OF THE BASIC LAW,
OF "THE BILL, WHICH FOLLOWS CLOSELY THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT
AS SERVES
AN RIGHTS,
ADDITIONAL FUNCTION TO CIVIL AND POLITICAL
AFTER 1997," ENSURE CONTINUITY OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROVISIONS BEFORE AND HE SAID.
THAT
ON WHY HONG KONG NEEDED A BILL OF RIGHTS DESPITE THE FACT HUMAN RIGHTS HAD ALREADY BEEN PROTECTED IN HONG KONG BY COMMON LAW AND PROVISIONS IN A NUMBER OF STATUTES, DR LEONG SAID HONG KONG COULD NOT CONTINUE TO RELY ON THE COMMON KONG SYSTEM OF LAW WAS GOING TO BE ON ITS OWN.
BRITISH
THAT AFTER 1997, LAW AS THE HONG
COURTS WOULD NOT BE
BY THEN, PRECEDENTS ESTABLISHED IN NECESSARILY BIND HONG KONG COURTS. AT BEST, THESE CASES COULD ONLY USED FOR REFERENCE AND AS A PERSUASIVE FORCE.
A MBANS TO FILL
HE SAW THE ENACTMENT OF A BILL OF RIGHTS AS THIS "LEGAL VACUUM", EXCEPT THAT IT IS ALLOWED TO BE IN PLACE SOONER.
SOVEREIGNTY COVENANT BECOME OBSOLETE BECAUSE BUT PROVISIONS IN THE BASIC LAW WOULD
DR LEONG POINTED OUT THAT THERE WAS FEAR THAT WHEN
OF SECTIONS
THE INTERNATIONAL WAS HANDED OVER TO CHINA, WHICH WERE APPLICABLE TO HONG KONG MIGHT CHINA WAS NOT A SIGNATORY TO THE COVENANT. FORMS OF A BILL OF RIGHTS UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE REMEDY THIS SITUATION.
TURNING TO THE MORE SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THE BILL, DR LEONG SAID COURTS TO BE HE SUPPORTED SECTION 6(2) THAT PERMITTED ALL LEVELS OF ABLE TO INTREPRET AND APPLY THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
"HAVING
OF AN
THE
CONSTITUTIONAL
INTERNATIONAL
ISSUES
FROM THE
BY
VAGUE TRIBUNALS, WAY IN THE
ARISING
CONCEPTS
COVENANT DETERMINED MAGISTRATES AND COURTS AT EVERY LEVEL IS THE APPROPRIATE RIGHT DIRECTION," HE SAID.
"IT WILL HELP BUILD A SYSTEM EXPERIENCE AND TRADITION REQUIRED," HE ADDED.
OF PRECEDENTS
T
THE
NECESSARY
HE DESCRIBED A TWO-YEAR GRACE PERIOD BEFORE THE BILL, CAME EFFECT AS "TOTALLY UNCALLED FOR" AND AN "UNWANTED HURDLE",
HE ALSO
DISAGREED THAT THERE WAS A
INTO
CONFLICT BETWEEN
THE
MAINTENANCE OF LAW AND ORDER AND THE ENACTMENT OF THIS BILL.
DR LEONG
TWO MADE
SUGGESTIONS.
FIRST,
HE
SAID
PROVISIONS
SHOULD BE MADE TO ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO LEGAL AID IN EDUCATION PROGRAMME HUMAN RIGHT CASES. SECONDLY, A GOOD HUMAN RIGHTS
COURSES IN PRIMARY AND WAS NEEDED WHICH WOULD INCLUDE HUMAN RIGHTS
то PROGRAMME SECONDARY
BOOST TERRITORY-WIDE AND REGULAR AWARENESS AMONG THE LOCAL POPULATION, HE SAID.
SCHOOLS
/"TO CO-ORDINATE