*
thirdly, the proposed amendments of clause 16 to remove the 4+1 composition of the court, and the following related proposals -
the deletion of the separate category of non-permanent Hong Kong judges, by amendments to clauses 2, 5, 7, 8, 12 and 13;
the deletion from clause 10 of the maximum number (30) of non- permanent judges; and
the amendments of clause 14 relating to the tenure of office of judges.
The amendments I have referred to would, if passed, wreck the agreement, an agreement that has taken years to achieve, under which a proper Court of Final Appeal can be established on 1 July 1997, in such a way as to avoid a judicial vacuum. Members have before them a Bill that can ensure a smooth transition of our system of judicial appeals. It provides for the creation of a Court of Final Appeal that, subject only to the Basic Law as it must, has the same jurisdiction and powers as the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The passage of the Bill will be a milestone in the smooth transition of Hong Kong's legal system. It will end years of damaging, racking uncertainty and give confidence to the local community and foreign investors.
What would the amendments achieve? Two more years of uncertainty? No real chance of a better type of Court of Final Appeal being established after the transfer of sovereignty. The probability, I say a near, certainty, of a judicial vacuum after 1 July 1997.
Last week 11 of Her Majesty's Queens Counsel signed a statement urging members of this Council to support this Bill. The eminent lawyers spoke of the need to have a properly constituted Court of Final Appeal ready in the latter half of 1997 to handle important public law and other appeals that are likely to be generated when the Special Administrative Region government takes over. I like to quote from the
statement.
"The rule of law will be in jeopardy if there is then no authoritative court at the top of the judicial pyramid, because of delays and dissension in enacting fresh legislation and in setting up the Court. The present bill, underwritten by the Chinese Government, meets that need i.e. it meets the need to have a properly constituted court ready in the latter half of 1997, head on. And the two Governments are satisfied that it is in accordance with their Joint Declaration, and in accordance with the Basic Law."