TNAG-1917-FCO40-2721-Interdiction-of-Vietnamese-refugees-at-sea-1989 — Page 14

RG1AAV

DE

18-77

1.

Mr

Thorne

2. Mr Brenton

RESTRICTED

HONG KONG AND FIRST ASYLUM

1

•

>

Reference

195

Miss Dust (HKD)

In convection with my mind of today, This mong

VBRL Godi

ما هى

sex down you

sumed so wis portuges dut his Tortore Conversin

When

in paras 50 6 What' I book underlined. I helped Following Lord Glenarthur's first office meeting onregeare Vietnamese Boat People

Mr Brenton asked whether HMG would be unde contravening any international obligations, particularly the 20

the 20 sprea UN 1951 Convention on Refugees, if the Hong Kong Government The t withdrew first asylum. I have discussed this with Legal Advisers who are content with what follows. More careful consideration of the issues would however

necessary if the

matter

2.

is

taken any further.

be

Nor are

as

Neither the UN 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, nor the related UN 1987 Protocol, have been extended to Hong Kong, and therefore they do not apply there. there any plans to extend these instruments to Hong Kong,

made

clear in the reply to recent PQ.

a

Even if the Convention and/or Protocol had been extended to Hong Kong, however,

it is noteworthy that there is no mention of the concept of "first asylum in them.

was

-

3. It is however a feather in Hong Kong's cap that their screening procedures are consistent with the criteria laid down in these international instruments ie they apply the definition of a refugee as contained in them. The result is that Hong Kong is able to screen out some 90% of newly arrived Boat People as "economic migrants". Nevertheless, if Hong Kong were to withdraw first asylum, the new policy would not be consistent with Article 32 of the 1951 Convention, which provides that: "contracting states shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory ... [and] shall allow such a refugee a reasonable period within which to seek legal admission into another country".

4. While this would not put the UK in breach of its legal obligations (the Convention not having been extended to Hong Kong), there would undoubtedly be a publicity price to pay the public outcry outside Hong Kong would be immediate. At this stage the HKG are airing the threat intermittently: the attached Hong Kong telno 1480 (para 2), eg, puts the threat in context at this stage.

5.

It should also be pointed out that there are two other international covenants particularly relevant in the context: the international covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Hong Kong in the UK's

ratification

The

in

Inhuman or

19/-

extended to former was 1976. The latter is due

14

RESTRICTED