TNAG-1838-FCO40-2613-House-of-Commons-Select-Committee-on-Foreign-Affairs-enquiry-1989 — Page 3

CONFIDENTIAL

75)

"Draft tal. to Hery Mary HKB

Ms Marsden

Rritz

Hong Kong Department

RECEIVED IN BOGURTRY

From:

011/3

Date:

2 1FEB 1989

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

D M Edwards

Legal Counsellor

14 February 1989

(without encs) Mr Paul, HKD

RA

Action |

Mr McLaren

Mr Gillmore

FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ENQUIRY INTO HONG KONG

73

1. Please refer to your minute of 8 February about the question of whether the Governor and Hong Kong officials can be obliged to give evidence to the FAC. I attach a memorandum on the subject drafted by Mr MacLeod which he and I have discussed with Sir Arthur Watts. You may like to give a copy to Sir David Wilson for his own information when he visits London later this month. I do not think it would be appropriate for the memorandum to be circulated around Hong Kong government officials.

2. For the purposes of replying to Hong Kong telno 392, you may wish to draw on the following:

telno 325.

(a) We have now been able to look more thoroughly at the preliminary views contained in paragraph 6 of our We have reached similar conclusions about the legal position to those expressed in that telegram.

They

We have

(b) Officials of governments of dependent territories can be required to attend Westminster to give evidence relating to matters falling within the terms of reference of the Foreign Affairs Committee. can also be required to attend sessions of the Committee held in dependent territories. considered whether there is a valid counter-argument which might run as follows. Even though the jurisdiction of Parliament is absolute, Parliament (or in the case of Hong Kong the Crown) has, in establishing a Constitution for the territory, devolved important matters to it, and the FAC should not question the dependent territory's civil servants on those devolved matters. This would not be affected, the argument might run, by the fact that Parliament (or the Crown) has power to take back responsibility for the matters devolved. We have concluded, however, that such an argument is not sound. The Secretary of State has ultimate responsibility for dependent territories to Parliament, even for devolved matters.

CONFIDENTIAL