TNAG-0753-FCO40-957-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1978 — Page 122

5.

(a)

(b)

SECRET

for (say) ninety-nine years if the Crown shall

so long occupy the leased territories;

for (say) forty years, with the right of the Crown (and perhaps the tenant also) to determine

the lease by notice on 1 June 1997 if the Crown is to cease to occupy the leased territories (and perhaps on each subsequent 1 June in that event).

Even if my view is wrong, the lease could be for a term expiring on (say) ↑ June 1996 with provision for the tenancy to

continue from year to year thereafter until determined by six

months' notice on either side.

6•

I gather however that these devices are open to political or commercial objection and the preferred modality would be to

grant leases

for such period as the Crown may occupy the leased territories; or

(a)

(b)

that do not specify any period or any event to

cause their termination.

7.

Neither of these expedients is possible under the

existing law of Hong Kong and if either is to be adopted, it must be authorised by legislation. If such legislation were to be

enacted, it would I gather probably alter existing leases of

land in the leased territories that are due to expire three days before 1 July 1997 as well as granting powers to grant new ones of the type envisaged.

8. Such legislation could in my view be enacted by the Hong Kong legislature. Alternatively it could be enacted by Her Majesty in Council, but this would be an exceptional way of

proceeding and would not offer any advantage, since the

legislation would not stem from a fresh grant of jurisdiction from China (none in my view being necessary). As a matter of political prudence, the Chinese authorities would be consulted before the legislation was introduced, but this would not be a transaction having legal consequences.

SECRET

19.

There is