TNAG-1722-FCO40-2415-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Basic-Law-1988 — Page 125

J06 No. 166880

HANSARD//JULT3:08

|

1842

HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL 13 July 1988

MR. HU: Sir, in considering the first draft of the Basic Law, we have to keep in mind three basic principles. These principles together provide a guideline for determining whether each of the 172 articles in the Basic Law first draft is acceptable or beneficial to the future Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The first of these principles is that all provisions in the Basic Law should comply with the Sino-British Joint Declaration. The Basic Law should be a faithful reflection of the terms in the Joint Declaration, including the three annexes. Provisions in the Basic Law should not exceed those stipulated in the Joint Declaration. On the other hand, the Basic Law should also not skip any areas which are mentioned in the Joint Declaration.

Secondly, the provisions in the Basic Law should be flexible, with room for further development and expansion. Although the terms in the Basic Law have to be definitive, it does not mean that they have to be restrictive. If the Basic Law is drafted in such a way that it rules out any chance for further development, the future SAR Government will find its hands tied and may be incapable of coping with the changing situation. This will in turn upset the stability and prosperity of Hong Kong.

The 'one country, two systems' policy towards Hong Kong is accepted by the Hong Kong people; there is also no dispute that Hong Kong's sovereignty will be resumed by China. However, it appears that the Chinese leaders are over-anxious about China's sovereign rights over Hong Kong, and have sometimes gone over board to demonstrate this point, which is unnecessary. The third principle therefore concerns the over-emphasis of sovereign rights on the part of China. As one of the main objectives of the Basic Law is to ensure a high degree of autonomy for the Hong Kong SAR, it would not be proper to place too much emphasis on China's sovereign right over Hong Kong. This may create adverse effect on the promise ‘of a high degree of autonomy' and would shatter the confidence among the Hong Kong people.

Based on the above three principles. I have the following observations and suggestions in regard to the different articles in the draft Basic Law.

Article 16 stipulates that legislations made in the Special Administrative Region could be returned for consideration or revoked by the Standing Committee of the Chinese National People's Congress if it considers that the legislation in question is not in conformity with the Basic Law or legal procedures. It is feared that this provision will give China too much opportunity to unduly interfere with Hong Kong's affairs. More stringent conditions will be needed for this provision to protect the high degree of autonomy of the SAR.

The case for article 17 is equally questionable. Paragraph 3 of article 17 of the draft Basic Law states that: 'Laws, enacted by the National People's Congress or its Standing Committee, which relate to defence and foreign affairs as well as other laws which give expression to national unity and territorial integrity' are