TNAG-1167-FCO40-1447-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1982 — Page 171

-

شکست

SECRET

Office No. 33 5994

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

London SWIA 2AH.

(31) See HER 040/1 © 1982

23 October 1981

H Steel Esq CMG OBE Law Officers' Department Attorney-General's Chambers

Royal Courts of Justice Strand

WC2A 2LL

My dear Henry

FUTURE OF HONG KONG

2.

17

Sii

Please refer to your letter of 28 July, reference 400/79/177.

I now enclose copies of three minutes which I think you will find self-explanatory.

3. Any views you may care to express will of course be welcome and if you think a discussion would be useful I am at your service.

4.

See Hier 04011 © 1982

The problem, as I see it, cannot be solved by legal advice as Mr Williamson says in his minute, HMG may have to gamble and the question whether or not to do so is one of policy, not of law.

15.

If one could be reasonably confident that the UK and China could negotiate and reach an acceptable agreement, then the legal modalities required for the implementation of that agreement should not be difficult to work out.

6.

I should perhaps explain, however, that, in writing my minute of 15 October, I was influenced by the idea that the Chinese cannot necessarily be relied upon to enter into an express agreement authorizing the UK to act in any particular way and that their reluctance to do so might be so strong as to oblige them to prevaricate in the face of any proposition the UK might put forward, however reasonable it might seem in itself

my thought was that the Chinese might conceivably acquiesce in a fait accompli that in fact suited them even if they could not agree to it expressly beforehand or endorse it expressly after- wards. If a change were made to UK municipal law unilaterally

(ie without HMG having requested and obtained their prior concurrence) and the Chinese held their peace and let the UK carry on as hitherto, our position would be materially improved.

Bu & was

J

28.10.

SECRET

1

7.