TNAG-1553-FCO40-2117-Hong-Kong-Control-of-Publications-Consolidation-Ordinance-19-1986 — Page 220

CONFIDENTIAL

10.

common

I aw,

rules of equity,

subordinate legislation and autonomy law)

maintained save for any that contravene

ordinances,

should be

the Basic

power of

s ome signs

this, and

at least

Law and subject to any amendment by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the

final adjudication". There have been

that the Chinese intend to interpret

other similar passages in the agreement,

when it suits them, to mean the laws as they were in 1984 when the Agreement was initialled, while we

interpret it as the laws as they will be on 30 June

1997. We cannot exclude that the Chinese might

state this position publicly in response to a change of the type now proposed. This difficulty will arise whenever we seek to make changes in Hong Kong between n ow and 1997. But in my view repeal

this ordinance is not the sort of issue on which

should choose to tackle the Chinese on these

of

we

wider questions.

the

We could instruct Peking to mak e

following

points in reply if the Chinese did raise the issue of

repeal:

(a)

the ordinance was enacted in 1951, when the

situation in Hong Kong was entirely different from that prevailing today;

(b)

the

not

(c)

in

unnecessary and could

powers are archaic and

realistically be used in present day Hong Kong;

the unlikely event of violently hostile propaganda being published by those seeking to

undermine Hong Kong's stability and prosperity, adequate powers exist in other legislation.

emergency, special powers could be taken.

In an

CONFIDENTIAL