TNAG-2005-FCO40-2853-Hong-Kong-political-parties-1990 — Page 174

C

4.

The Prime Minister has recently written to

Mr Paddy Ashdown MP stressing that the decision to prosecute was taken by the Hong Kong Attorney General and that it is

for the Hong Kong Government to handle these cases in accordance with Hong Kong law.

5.

In his latest letter, Mr Bowen Wells argues that the laws concerned make it difficult to conduct a proper election campaign and need to be reviewed. The Hong Kong Government are currently reviewing all existing legislation to ensure that it is compatible with the Bill of Rights and the relevant provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). But we understand that the Summary Offences Ordinance is unlikely to be repealed since the ICCPR permits restrictions necessary for the protection of the rights of others and public order. The Hong Kong Government have made clear that they regard the control of the use of loudspeakers in public as important in Hong Kong's highly urbanised environment. Permits to

collect money in public have long been issued by the Director of Social Welfare to ensure that only bona fide organisations are allowed to solicit funds from the public.

6.

There is no question of seeking to suppress compaigning for any particular point of view as Mr Bowen Wells suggests. It is not unreasonable, and not necessarily incompatible with the ICCPR, to have laws dealing with these matters on the statute book. The real question is whether it is reasonable, or proportionate to the requirements of public order, to use them in particular cases. We could not commit ourselves on that and it may well be that the decision to prosecute in this case could be regarded as a rather heavy handed application of the laws in question. In view of the

CC5ABY/2