XN000022-1997-01-30 — Page 2

-

1.

Statement by the Governor

The following is a statement today (Thursday) by the Governor, the Rt Hon Christopher Patten, on the continuing debate over civil liberties in Hong Kong.

It is now almost a fortnight since the media reported recommendations - yet to be officially announced or explained by a Sub Group of the Preparatory Committee to repeal or amend certain Hong Kong Ordinances, including the Bill of Rights Ordinance (BORO), the Societies (Amendment) Ordinance of 1992 and the Public Order (Amendment) Ordinance of 1995. The Preparatory Committee will meet in Peking this weekend. It will no doubt be considering the recommendations which have been put to it, as well as the reaction to which these recommendations have given rise in Hong Kong and internationally.

I hope that in doing so the Preparatory Committee will pay careful attention to the opinions which have been expressed by virtually the entire community in Hong Kong: by those who speak, for example, for business, for the practice of law, for the media and for the grass roots; even by members of the Preparatory Committee itself and of the so-called Provisional Legislature. On few issues over the years has there been such a clear and broad consensus, embracing almost all shades of the political spectrum. To these voices have been added those overseas - including not only British Ministers but most recently President Clinton who wish Hong Kong well, and who want to believe in "one country, two systems", but who are deeply concerned at the prospect that Hong Kong's freedoms will be eroded.

-

If, in the light of these opinions and the advice which it will no doubt hear from those of its members who have been appointed to speak for Hong Kong people, the Preparatory Committee decides to draw back from endorsing these ideas, Hong Kong will breath a sigh of relief, and the "one country, two systems" model will pass, and be seen to pass, one of the stiffest tests which it has so far faced. If not, the damage to Hong Kong will be enormous and irrevocable.

Why are these proposals so harmful, and just how much do they put at stake? The Joint Declaration promised that Hong Kong will continue to enjoy a "high degree of autonomy" except in foreign affairs and defence; that its way of life and its cherished freedoms will be protected, in particular by the continued application of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); and that, above all, the established common law system, the foundation of which is the rule of law, will continue to prevail. These are the standards against which not only these proposals but any decision about Hong Kong's future must be measured if the "one country, two systems" concept is to fulfil the promise which its architects intended.