TNAG-1755-FCO40-2475-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Parliamentary-debates-1988 — Page 105

A.

BASIC LAW

RESTRICTED

1. Consistency with the Joint Declaration?

Much of the draft reproduces provisions of the Joint

Declaration, often word for word. But some parts of the Joint

Declaration are in very general terms and it would be possible to

give effect to them in more than one way. Here the question of consistency is a much more complex one: more than one assessment may be possible. We do not wish to come to premature conclusions: we

are listening carefully to all the views expressed, in the House and

in Hong Kong.

sure will the Chinese authorities.

2. Human rights provisions in Basic Law?

We welcome the provision in Article 38 of the draft Basic Law

which stipulates that the provisions of the two International

Covenants on Human Rights shall be implemented in the Hong Kong SAR.

We are aware of criticisms in Hong Kong that other parts of the

draft are inconsistent with Article 38, and in particular that

Article 39 allows for greater restrictions to be imposed in

Hong Kong than are permissible under the Covenants. It is by no

means clear at this stage whether this is a matter of substance or a

matter of drafting. Chinese officials have indicated that there is

no intention to impose greater restrictions than exist at present. We think it should be possible to devise drafting improvements which

will resolve this issue. But we shall continue to consider the

point carefully in the light of the views expressed.

We have also taken note of the views of some commentators:

AIDAFI

that the rights listed in Chapter III do not match up

entirely with those in the Covenants;

that references in appropriate parts of this chapter of

the draft Basic Law should be to "arbitrariness" rather

than to "unlawfulness";

RESTRICTED

Page 105Page 106