2 -
Acts of State
The proposed amendments, however well-intentioned, as a matter of law cannot override Article 19 of the Basic Law as from July 1, 1997. Inclusion of the clause on "Acts of State" makes no difference to the Court's jurisdiction in 1997, but ensures that the JLG agreement can be implemented.
It is misleading to criticise the JLG agreement or the Bill for something which they did not, and could not, deal with, on the argument that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress will, in certain situations, be able to decide what is or is not an act of state.
Composition of the Court
It is now clear that there is no chance that the Chinese side will renegotiate the 4 plus I composition. Independent legal opinions have supported the Administration's view that this composition is not inconsistent with the Joint Declaration or Basic Law.
Other Amendments
Some of the other proposed amendments add nothing to the Bill in terms of its legal effect and are therefore legally unnecessary. Others, such as the proposals to abolish appeals as of right in civil cases, and to allow a leapfrogging procedure in respect of civil cases, would make fundamental changes to the system of appeals that currently applies in respect of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Mr Mathews pointed out to the Council that the Administration could not support any amendments to the Bill that breached the British Government's international obligations.
He would have no alternative but to withdraw the Bill in the event that any such amendments were passed.
End/Wednesday, July 26, 1995