TNAG-2173-FCO40-3110-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-1990 — Page 6

Constitutional Affairs

(Artn. Mr. Michael M.Y. Suen)

From:

Ref.

in

5290015

5 JAN 1990 Your

in

Tel. No.

4 January 1900

dore

Date

CAR B3/11 (89)

20.12.89

Bill of Rights for Hong Kong

I refer to your memorandum of 20 December 1989.

My comments on the ExCo memorandum are as follows:-

Para. 13(b)

Para. 13 (c)

Para. 20

Interpretation

The drafting of Clause 2(3) of the Bill appears to be defective. It is surely not intended that the normal rules of statutory interpretation shall not apply to the Bill of Rights. Is it not intended that those rules shall apply but that the matters in Clause 2(3) (a) and (b) shall take precedence. If this is the case will the Bill of Rights be interpreted by reference to the general aims of the Covenant or by reference to the specific words used. I find the present drafting ambiguous on this point.

Rights

I note that the right to own private property has been omitted from the list of rights set out in Part 11. Would it not be appropriate to include reference to that right here?

Citizen v. Citizen

I wonder whether it is necessary, in the context of Hong Kong's well-developed legal system, for the Bill to confer additional rights of action, based on violations of the Bill of Rights, between citizens.

I understand that the usual Commonwealth model Bill of Rights states that it only confers rights on the citizen vis a vis Government. I believe this model was adopted with success in Canada's