TNAG-1957-FCO40-2786-Hong-Kong-Animals-and-Plants-(Protection-of-Endangered-Speci-1989 — Page 88

CONFIDENTIAL

this idea outside the Conference we would have to argue that it was in the interests of all CITES parties to try to prevent the ivory trade from going under ground, particularly as the Convention does

provide for compensation. But in view of the substantial majority at the CITES Conference against trade in existing scheme, there is no reason to suppose that other CITES parties would be willing to contribute to a fund primarily for Hong Kong's benefit. If the UK were to take the lead in calling for such a fund, we would no doubt have to be prepared to contribute to it (unless the Hong Kong Government was prepared to contribute on behalf of Hong Kong and the UK). Furthermore this could lead to calls for compensation

for three Southern African States which have been deprived of revenue from raw ivory as a result of the CITES decision.

Six Month Reservation

10.

There are good arguments in favour of entering a six month

reservation on Hong Kong's behalf:

(a) In political terms, we would be strongly criticised in Hong Kong for failing to act in a matter of real importance to

the territory;

(b) The Legislative Council could in any case block or delay the introduction of the legislation necessary to implement the

ban beyond the 90 day period. This could cause a serious

constitutional crisis. It could also prevent Hong Kong from complying with the ban, thus putting the UK in breach of the

Convention;

(c) Unless Hong Kong's ivory traders are given sufficient time to dispose of their stocks in an orderly fashion, the trade will be driven underground.

11. It is also possible that if we were to refuse to enter a

reservation on Hong Kong's behalf, pressure from the ivory traders for compensation for their losses might be transferred from the Hong

Kong Government to HMG. Although our Legal Advisers consider that

the chances of any such litigation succeeding in the UK would be

CONFIDENTIAL