XN000022-1995-11-16 — Page 3

- 2 -

I just make one final point, and it is not meant solely rhetorically. What is the problem about reporting? If, as we all hope and believe, the international covenant is still to apply to Hong Kong after 1997, if there is no need for anybody to be concerned about the continuance of Hong Kong's way of life and the continuance of Hong Kong's civil liberties, then what is the problem about reporting? There's nothing to hide. So I hope that that point will be addressed more positively by Chinese officials and we will certainly continue to put the point very vigorously to them because I am sure that it is one of the reasons why there is concern - I don't state the point controversially, it's a matter of fact - why there is concern about civil liberties and the future of our way of life after 1997.

Mr Lee Wing-tat (in Chinese): A follow up. The JD is an agreement signed by two sovereign states and both these two countries have the right to make sure that human rights are protected as entrenched in the JD. And yet, the Chinese Government has repeatedly said that it does not feel that it has the obligation to report because it is not a signatory state. Now, if in the coming days they still hold on to this point, then what can you do? Are there ways that is, approved internationally are there ways that you can resort to in order to resolve the issue?

L

-

-

-

Governor: Let me make an obvious point at the outset. The easiest way it is not for me to recommend this way or others but the easiest way for China to meet concerns and to meet its obligations would be to accede to the International Covenants. That, I am sure, would be welcome to everyone. But there are other ways in which China can continue to meet the obligations which, I repeat, were stated in terms, stated explicitly, by the Chairman of the UN Human Rights Committee itself; terms which exist jurisprudentially, obligations which exist because of the Joint Declaration. The UN Human Rights Committee now has a body of experience to draw on which underpins its view that human rights devolve to the people of the territory, and when the government of that territory or when sovereignty changes, it doesn't mean that the human rights that are guaranteed, change. One of the human rights that guarantees that people have been given in Hong Kong is contained in the covenants: the reporting obligation on individual states. And that continues to exist.

What recourse would be open after 1997 were China not to report - or were China not, for example, which some people have said might be one way through, to agree to the SAR Government issuing reports - what recourse would be available then would clearly be to take the issue up at the United Nations more generally. But I very much hope, and I am sure that all honourable members share this hope, that that is totally unnecessary.