Y
Continuing Questions of Substance
Although the February
1989 text made a number of changes which we had proposed for your consideration (and I again express our gratification for these changes) there remain a number of issues, additional to those set out above, which we have discussed on previous occasions, but which I would urge you to consider further. I am unable to go into detail in a letter of this length. I outline below examples of such issues. But they do of course need to be addressed in more detail.
(a)
(b)
The question whether an express provision should be included in the Basic Law for an implementing provision as regards the jurisdiction of the Hong Kong courts over members of those PRC organs which are required to abide by the law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (Articles 14 and
22). You may recall we suggested a formula for your consideration on the following lines: "Provisions for the determination by the courts of the Special Administrative Region of cases involving organs and authorities of the PRC or their staff (including those referred to in Articles 14 and 22 of this Law), and for the
payment Of compensation by such organs or authorities or members of such staff, shall be prescribed by the law of the Special Administrative Region. #1
Freedom of movement as regards residents and
non-residents
recall that
(Articles 24 and 31).
You may
Article 31 (which provides all
residents with
a right of entry) does not appear to be consistent with Article 24 which states that
non-residents do not have the right of abode. I
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.