TNAG-1402-FCO40-1874-Future-of-Hong-Kong-continued-participation-in-the-General-A-1985 — Page 144

CONFIDENTIAL

14. The absence of positive constitutional provision or

of a convention disenables us from asserting a positive

It would

legal basis on which we could justify an assertion of

autonomy. It does not, it is suggested, preclude our using

in the GATT context the practical approach outlined

in para

9 above, so long as we do not pretend, if

challenged, that it is more than an approach based on

practice and that the practice is not immutable.

not be our purpose to assert that, as a matter of law

power has passed to Hong Kong (or any authority in

Hong Kong) and cannot be recalled. It is our purpose

to state what as a matter of practice and political

reality is the situation and that, so long as that

situation persists, it justifies us in asserting autonomy

for the purpose of the GATT. It is recognised that that

may be challenged; on reflection, it may not satisy the

relevant authorities of the GATT or other parties to the

GATT. If so, it may be necessary to think again. It is

unlikely that such a declaration as is proposed would

lead

to any justiciable process.

15.

We would therefore be grateful if you would seek the

Attorney General's view on the following questions:-

(a) that so far as the GATT is concerned, we could

defend a declaration that Hong Kong possesses

full autonomy in the conduct of its

external commercial relations on the basis

of HMG's consistent policy that it should

11

CONFIDENTIAL

/conduct