TNAG-1388-FCO40-1859-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Sino-British-Joint-Declaration-1985 — Page 142

DWF FFF 011/2

Pa

95

TT FCO

TT HONG KONG

GR$ 780

CONFIDENTIAL

PLEASE NOTE

_COPY TO NTD.

done 2/4

COPIES

AND FGD

AND LEGAL ADVISERS

PROCED TO

TELELETTER

FROM:-

T WM SMITH ESQ.,

EKING

FILE REF 020/39/18

DATED 2 MAY 1995

FOLLOWING FOR:- COPIED TO:

JN POWELL ESQ, HKD FCO

RP MARGOLIS ESQ, DPA, HONG KONG

MISS SHEPHERD NTD FCO

1 C ORR ESQ, FED FCO

MR BICKFORD LEGAL ADVISERS FGO

Накатла

13 MAY 1985

LM.

82

YOUR TELELETTER OF APRIL: HONG KONG AGREEMENT:

RATIFICATION

1. I HAD A FURTHER MEETING WITH YIN YUBIAO OF THE MFA ON 30 APRIL.,

2. TOLD YIN OF OUR PREFERENCE FOR THE CHINESE TO APPEND THE

FULL TEXT OF THE AGREEMENT IN CHINESE AND ENGLISH A

TO THEIR INSTRUMENT (PARAGRAPH 3(A) OF TUUR). HE TOOK

NOTE AND UNDERTOOK TO REPORT. HE GAVE ME

NO INDICATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD BE

PROPARED TO COMPLY WITH OUR WISH.

3. IN RESPONSE TO HIS QUESTION ABOUT OUR INTRUMENT ! GAVE HIM THE INFORMATION IN FCO TEL NO 523 TO HONG KONG (1 DID NOT MENTION THE DATE IN THE PENULTIMATE. SENTENCE OF THAT TELEGRAM). YIN ASKED ME WHAT THE LEGAL BASIS WAS FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO SIGN OUR INSTRUMENT. WERE SUCH INSTRUMENTS ALWAYS SIGNED BY HIM OR WERE THERE CERTAIN TREATIES THE INSTRUMENTS OF RATIFICATION FOR WHICH WERE SIGNED BY OTHERS? I ASKED YIN THE REASON FOR HIS QUESTION. HE SAID THAT THE CHINESE CONSTITUTION STIPULATED THAT THE PRESIDENT SHOULD SIGN

ALL CHINESE INSTRUMENTS OF RATIFICATION. DID WE HAVE A SIMILAR LEGAL OR CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION THAT THE

SECRETARY OF STATE SHOULD SIGN FOR US?

I TOLD YIN I WOULD ENQUIRE, ADDING THAT MY UNDERSTANDING

WAS THAT IT WAS NORMAL PRACTICE ON OUR SIDE

FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO SIGN INSTRUMENTS OF RATIFICATION.

(COMMENT: YIN'S CONCERN NO DOUBT THAT OUR INSTRUMENT

WILL NOT MATCH THEIRS IF IT IS NOT SIGNED BY THE

HEAD OF STATE. IT MAY BE THAT HE WILL ACCEPT WITHOUT FURTHER

QUERY OUR NORMAL PRACTICE, BUT IN CASE HE RETURNS TO THE SUBJECT

IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE MATERIAL ON WHICH

TO DRAW IN EXPLANATION OF OUR PROCEDURE.)

4. YIN REMARKED THAT THE WORDING OF OUR INSTRUMENT

CONTAINED NO MENTION OF THE ACTUAL STEP OF RATIFICATION ON OUR

SIDE, WHEREAS THE CHINESE INSTRUMENT WOULD STATE THAT THE AGREEMENT HAD BEEN RATIFIED BY LI XIANNIAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECISION OF THE NATIONAL PEOPLE'S CONGRESS. HE THEREFORE

WONDERED WHAT THE LEGAL PROCEDURES ON OUR SIDE

WERE WHEN THE AGREEMENT WAS RATIFIED.

1 EXPLAINED THE STEPS TAKEN ON OUR SIDE AND SAID THAT

I THOUGH THE DIFFERENCE HE HAD POINTED OUT REFLECTED

THE DIFFERENCE IN THE TWO SIDE'S LEGA PROCEDURES.

HE APPEARED TO ACCEPT THIS.

5. ON THE DRAFT PROTOCOL OF EXCHANGE, I SPOKE AS IN PARAGRAPH 3(B)

AND (C) OF TLUR. YIN. ASKED WHAT THE CORRECT REFERENCE

TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE SHOULD BE. ! PRESUME

IT SHOULD BE THE RIGHT HONOURABLE SIR GERFFREY HOWE QC, MP,

-7 HER MAJESTY'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND

4

COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS. IF THIS IS CORRECT (GRATEFUL FOR CONFIRMATION

}

I SHALL LET YIN KNOW AND HE AND WILL THEN EXCHANGE DRAFTS OF THE PROTOCOL IN CHINESE AND ENGLISH FOR COMPARISON.

ARE YOU CONTENT FOR US TO CHECK THE CHINESE TEXT OF THE PROTOCOL

OR WOULD YOU WISH IT TO BE SENT TO YOU FOR EXAMINATION?

6. YIN WOULD NOT BE DRAWN ON WHICH SENIOR CHINESE OFFICIALS MIGHT ATTEND THE CEREMONY.

7. TOLD YIN THAT WE WERE LOOKING INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF OBTAINING A COPY OF THE DOCUMENT CONFERRING

ROYAL ASSENT.

6. THE TIMING OF RATIFICATION WAS NOT DISCUSSED.

SIGNED...

,T WN SMITH

NNNN