TNAG-1311-FCO40-1673-Future-of-Hong-Kong-1984 — Page 34

SWB

FE/7818/A3/5

5 Dec 84

مه

region. Hongkong's previous capitalist system and life-style shall remain unchanged for 50 years." Article 31 of the constitution stipulates that the systems to be instituted in the special administrative regions shall be prescribed by a law enacted by the NPC in light of the specific conditions. The fact that the socialist system and socialist policies are not implemented in Hongkong is decided by the "basic law of the Hongkong special administrative region" enacted and promulgated by the NPC.

Ours is a socialist country, and the socialist system should be practised throughout the country. However, the necessity of maintaining the capitalist system in particular regions such as Hongkong and Taiwan is not ruled out. We took this matter __into_consideration while amending the constitution, and Article 31 was thus enacted. "The system practised in the special administrative regions" refers, of course, to another system which is different from that implemented throughout the country. Otherwise it would not be necessary to make such a stipulation.

Maintaining the capitalist system in Hongkong and Taiwan is a policy towards them which will not be changed for a long time, because it is helpful for the reunification and socialist construction of our country. We persist in implementing the socialist system in our country. However, we should develop and change our specific measures in light of the development and changes of the practical conditions. Furthermore, the so-called "no change" means that the central authorities will not change their policies and guiding principles. The central authorities will not change the system in Hongkong and the life-style of Hongkong people.

(3) Hongkong is our territory. The policy we work out for our territory is our internal affair. The 12 basic policies and guiding principles of our country toward Hongkong have been enshrined in the "joint declaration". Does this mean that we allow Britain to interfere in our internal affairs, and to infringe upon our sovereignty, thus violating the principle of our constitution? My answer is no, because it is our country which has decided to implement these basic policies and guiding principles for a long time. Part Three of the "joint declaration" has made clear that the statement on these policies and guiding principles is made by our side. It is neither an agreement reached by both sides, nor any bargain. We are not forced to comply with the demands set by Britain. There is no such problem as interference in our internal affairs. The fact that we issued a joint declaration rather than concluding a treaty has demonstrated our wishes. Broadly speaking, this “joint statement” is authentic in terms of international law, and legally binding. We should abide by and be legally bound by it. There is no doubt about this.

(4) The "joint declaration" says: "The Hongkong special administrative region will be vested with executive, legislative and independent judicial powers, including that of final adjudication." It adds: "The laws currently in force in Hongkong will remain basically unchanged." Does this actually mean that Hongkong will become an independent political entity which stands side by side with the PRC, and is not governed by the central government? Will this not create a situation of "one China, one Hongkong" which conflicts with the preamble of our constitution that China is a unified country? The answer is no.

We now discuss the issues of law:

(i) The "joint declaration" says that "the laws currently in force will remain basically unchanged." This does not mean that all laws will not be changed. The declaration has explicitly stipulated that the "Hongkong special administrative region will be directly under the authority of the central people's government of the PRC.” It has also stressed that foreign and defence affairs will be governed by the central people's government. The laws which belong to the colonial rule and are imbued with colonial colouring should, of course, not be retained. The "elaboration of basic policies regarding Hongkong" has also clearly explained that all laws which contravene the basic law should not be retained. Apart from that, those laws which are considered as inappropriate and thus amended by the Hongkong special administrative region legislature will not be retained either. The so-called laws currently in force, or former laws, refer to those laws