TNAG-1378-FCO40-1826-Future-of-Hong-Kong-legislation-Hong-Kong-Bill-1985 — Page 71

CONFIDENTIAL

Subsection

paragraph 8 of

exchange

the

1(2) provides for this clause of the Bill to come into

force on the

of instruments of ratification, which

Joint Declaration states must take place before

30 June 1985. The exact date on which instruments of ratification

will be exchanged is not yet known, and will depend both on the date

on which this Bill receives Royal Assent, and on the date when the

Chinese are ready to ratify. The date of the exchange of

instruments of ratification will be notified in the London Gazette

in order to avoid the Secretary of State being presented with

repeated requests to certify that date, eg for the purposes of

litigation in the UK courts

We

Some members of the Executive Council

the Executive Council of Hong Kong remain convinced that we should deal with the termination of sovereignty by a clause

enabling an Order in Council to be made at a later stage, perhaps

much nearer to 1997. This was an option that we considered earlier

in discussion with EXCO. We were well aware of the presentational advantages in Hong Kong of withholding the Order until after the

publication by the Chinese Government of the Basic Law for Hong

Kong, which mus t enshrine the provisions of the agreement.

accordingly considered a scheme whereby ratification preceded an Order in Council divesting the UK of sovereignty. The Attorney

General however advised

advised that such a scheme was acceptable if (but

only if) the Order was not in any way subject to Parliamentary approval. The parliamentary managers agree that Parliament could indeed seek to retain control by making the Order subject to

affirmative or negative procedures. Ministers therefore decided to

deal with the termination of sovereignty by a clause in the Bill

itself. Presentation apart, there is no practical difference

between the two possible courses.

I f the Chinese were to commit

s ome fundamental breach of the agreement Parliament

to repeal the Hong Kong Act, including its termination of sovereignty. This would have the declining to approve an Order in Council.

however

very unlikely to arise.

Given the

reversion to China of

to China of the New Territories

to see what our action would achieve.

Such

could be asked

provisions for

same effect as

a situation is

inevitability of the

in 1997, it is also hard

CONFIDENTIAL