3.
AG on Court of Final Appeal Bill - second reading debate
Following is the speech by the Attorney General, the Hon Jeremy Mathews, in the resumption of the second reading debate of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Bill in the Legislative Council today (Wednesday):
Mr President,
I am grateful to the Chairman of the Bills Committee, the Hon Simon Ip, and to members of the Bills Committee for their prompt and thorough study of this Bill. The Bill was introduced into this Council only 6 weeks ago, and the Bills Committee quickly held 9 meetings in order to consider all aspects of the Bill. The Administration is indebted to the members of the committee for dealing with the Bill so expeditiously.
In going through the Bill clause by clause, the Bills Committee suggested a number of possible improvements that the Administration has accepted. In addition, the Administration has itself identified a few drafting improvements to the Bill. As a result, I will later today be moving 13 amendments to the Bill. I will explain the purpose of each of these amendments at the Committee Stage.
Amendments inconsistent with the JLG agreement
I turn now to amendments proposed by other members of this Council. I do so in the context of the major concerns that have been raised in the course of a long and serious debate. When future generations have come to look at the record of this Council in considering the CFA, whatever assessment they would make, one that they certainly cannot make is that this Council had not fully, thoroughly and seriously considered one of the most important bills ever put before it. Lest there be any misunderstanding, let me state, at the outset that the Administration cannot support any amendment to the Bill that would be inconsistent with the JLG agreement signed last month. About half of the amendments proposed by members of the Council fall into that category. In particular, the following amendments are all inconsistent with that agreement -
firstly, the proposed amendments of the delayed commencement provision in clause 1(2);
secondly, the proposed amendments of clause 4, which relates to acts of state;