TNAG-1827-FCO40-2595-Mutual-legal-assistance-between-Hong-Kong-and-the-UK-and-USA-1988 — Page 111

CODE 18-77

3zılı

HUD. 371

3 MAR 1988

FICER

Separate copies:

RESTRICTED

Mr Carpenter (Lord Chancellor's Department)

Mr Grainger

(Legal Advisers)

(Legal Advisers)

Mr Fifoot

Mr Monk

(NTD)

Mr Wood

(HKD)

Mr Street

(ERD)

TRED

Reference..........................................

EK+R

Ook+R with reftel pl.

0/3

laverks

Enter & ps.

HKD 371/1 7257

MUTUAL JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE PRC

1.

242 HUD 314/2

I should be grateful if you could cast your minds back to Peking Telno 352 of 23 February. I am sorry it has taken

me so long to solicit views on this telegram.

2. I agree with Miss Bailes' conclusion in pargraph 6 that our next step must be either to make a formal approach or to decide to let the matter drop. The decision is largely a political one: legally there is not an overwhelming case for a bilateral agreement. But I think we are all agreed that China is unlikely to accede to the relevant Hague conventions in the near future and that a bilateral agreement could offer some advantage and protection to British businessmen in their trade and financial dealings with China. Politically, part of the development of our bilateral relations with China is to seek to bring her more into the international framework of institutions of all kinds either by multilateral or bilateral agreements. (We have signed 10 bilateral agreements with China in the last four years). Obviously there is no point in signing agreements for the sake of it. But legal exchanges is a priority area in our relations with China: after 20 years of rule by administrative directive, China is in the process of drawing up a body of laws which will in theory be independent of executive power. We have an interest in promoting the evolution of a Chinese legal system which encourages reform and opening to the outside world and facilitates foreign investment and business under fair conditions. The negotiation of a bilateral judicial assistance agreement would be useful in bringing us to a better understanding of how Chinese legal circles are thinking and the end result would improve conditions for businessmen operating in China.

3. I believe therefore that the political arguments for an agreement outweigh the doubts about its legal necessity. I understand from Michael Carpenter's letter of 10 December 1987 to Richard Fletcher-Cooke that LCD, who would probably be responsible for the bulk of the work involved, do not

S21AAR

RESTRICTED