RESTRICTED
procedural position there should be fewer difficulties
although it would be well to check there would be no
complications.
10. In discussion, various views were expressed in
regard to Mr Haddon-Cave's questions.
If
was. Eenerally
In
felt that Article XXIV 1 did preclude a GATT relation-
ship between Hong Kong and the UK, and that the pro-
vision in Article XXVI 5) was intended to apply to
dependent territories with a large measure of internal self-government and/or approaching full independence,
either of which was applicable to Hong Kong).
point was raised whether the provisions in Article
XXVI 1 could be amended in prosent ciroumstances.
this connection the Chairman referred to an earlier
opinion of the FCO Legal Adviser in which the latter
gave his view that although it would be legally possi-
to grant Hong Kong autonomy in GATT mutters, blek he found it very difficult to reconcile autonomy
in external commercial affairs with the constitutional
position. Mr Haddon-Cave agreed with this view. He
also expressed reserve about external commercial auto-
nomy for Hong Kong in regard to the reaction of China,
although he thought the Chinese less sensitive now in
this regard than they had been a few years ago.
11.
The meeting concluded that the juridical position
and the interpretation of the GATT was one on which a
legal view was essential. Miss Elliott undertook to
put this question to Mr Laird in writing so that the
FCO Legal Adviser would be able to comment.
Practical Implications
12.
It was recognised that the Legal Adviser's advice
/in regard
of Article XXIV (1) felid praclude of
GATT relationship betwiceum #UK.
and Hong Kong even if the 'n. Mac a cedar abu in the terms of Arbil XXVI (5
but it!
(©) was far from!
dear that this was precluded shd. Here by an attempt t alt GATT
rules?
SA S.UMLON
4
RESTRICTED
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.