TNAG-0356-FCO40-392-Extension-of-European-Convention-on-Human-Rights-to-Hong-Kon-1973 — Page 21

(b)

Reference

local courts fall down on the job. We should not be led astray, as Mr Beard apparently is, into thinking that the rights cannot exist distinct from the Convention or that they cannot be safeguarded by domestic machinery. But having regard to what we have done elsewhere, it may be difficult to take this point, and we might be hard put to it to find a further argument for saying that we did not wish at this time to round out our international obligations in this regard.

Does the law of Hong Kong, in the ordinary course of events, accord rights of the kind specified in the Convention? The essence of this is that if a Convention right is alleged to have been violated, will the domestic law of Hong Kong be capable of rectifying that violation? In this connection it should be realised that it does not matter whether the right is described in the same terms as in the Convention or whether it is described in comparable terms. This is very much a matter for Hong Kong and I agree with you that it is a point which we should take up with them. I would emphasise "in the ordinary course of events" because we have accepted in the past that it may be necessary from time to time to derogate from the rights granted under the Convention. We have so derogated in relation to, eg, Singapore, Cyprus, Nyasaland, Northern Rhodesia, Zanzibar, Kenya and Aden as well, of course, as in Northern Ireland.

1 December 1972

PRN Fifoot Legal Counsellor W 44/3 MB 1177

h

agree go into detail

with Mr Fifoot.

I think we should out

with

Ma

Beard

or the queire

(though

I think we

could

taut

the latter with

ON

confidence).

- 2

DD 897152 154596 500M 2/72 GM 3643/2