TNAG-1966-FCO40-2798-Relations-between-Hong-Kong-and-the-United-Nations-1989 — Page 11

CONFIDENTIAL

The letter was referred to the Working Group of the Committee of 24 for consideration and recommendation. On 10 March the Working Group decided to continue examination of the question and report to the Committee of 24 at a later date. It thus recommended that pending the submission of its recommendation, the Committee of 24 should defer consideration of the question of Hong Kong. On 17 May, the Working Group recommended that the General Assembly should adopt a decision removing Hong Kong from the list of non-self-governing territories. This recommendation was approved by the Committee of 24 on 6 June and included in its Report to the General Assembly (A/8723/Rev I).

6. The Report of the Committee of 24 was considered in plenary in late October 1972, and on 2 November the General Assembly approved the Report. (and thus the recommendation concerning Hong Kong) by Resolution 2908(XXVII) The United Kingdom voted against this Resolution which was adopted by 99-5(UK)-23 but did not participate in the discussion nor speak in explanation

of vote.

7. By the time the Committee of 24's Report was discussed in plenary, the United Kingdom had decided that if the General Assembly adopted the committee of 24's recommendation, it would cease to transmit information on Hong Kong under Article 73e. This decision was based on the following reagons; -considerations:- a) the Legal Advisers were of the view that it would be difficult

to avoid the conclusion that acceptance by the General Assembly of the recommendation would imply that Hong Kong was no longer considered by the General Assembly to be a territory to which Article 73e applied;

·

b) if the United Kingdom continued to transmit information, the UN Secretariat would be obliged to report the fact and this would probably lead to an annual confrontation over Hong Kong in the Committee of 24 and perhaps the General Assembly. The United Kingdom was anxious to avoid a public dispute with the Chinese over Hong Kong, hence the decision to refrain from participating in the discussion in plenary The UK also took the view that inviting annual opposition at the UN would have damaging consequences in the long term. Due to the greater publicity involved these consequences might be more serious than the discreet cessation of transmission by the United Kingdom. 8. The need to safeguard the United Kingdom's legal position on the question of cessation of transission of information was recognised, To do this it was necessary to put on record that the UK had decided to discontinue transmission because no practical purpose would be served by continuing transmission and not because the UK regarded the General Assembly action as effective to alter the status of Hong Kong or to terminate the operation of Article 73. A letter to this effect, from the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom to the United Nations, was sent to the Secretary-General on 19 December 1972, (A/8989) and no further information on Hong Kong was transmitted under Article 73e by the United Kingdom.

in

F

November 1982

CONFIDENTIAL

Sarah Foulds Research Department