TNAG-1117-FCO40-1391-Future-of-the-Dependent-Territories-1982 — Page 18

8.

3

By the time the Committee of 24's report was discussed in

Plenary, the then Government had decided that, if the General

Assembly adopted the Committee's recommendation, the United

Kingdom would cease to transmit information on Hong Kong under

Article 73(e). The reasoning was as follows. If the United

Kingdom were to continue to transmit information, the United

Nations Secretariat would so report. This would almost certainly

have led to an annual confrontation over Hong Kong in the

Committee of 24 and perhaps also in the General Assembly.

Against the background of the agreement to raise the status of

the missions in Peking and London to Embassies, the United Kingdom

was anxious to avoid public dispute with the Chinese over Hong

Kong (hence the decision to refrain from participating in the

discussion in the Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly).

The Government also took the view that to invite this kind of

confrontation each year at the United Nations would have damaging

consequences in the long term.

9.

Nevertheless, it was the view of our Legal Advisers that, if

the General Assembly approved the Committee of 24's report, it

could be assumed that the General Assembly also considered that

Article 73(e) of the Charter was no longer applicable to Hong Kong.

In these circumstances, and particularly if the Government were

to decide to cease transmitting information on Hong Kong under

that Article, it would be necessary to safeguard our legal position.

A letter, dated 14 December 1972, was therefore sent from the

Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the United

Nations Secretary-General putting on record that the United Kingdom

/had