TNAG-2174-FCO40-3111-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-1990 — Page 134

CONFIDENTIAL

in also needs to be brought out in support of Hong Kong's action is the necessity of going into greater detail than appears in the specific articles in Chapter III, the need to spell out the specific limits to restrictions on rights and the need to provide for remedies as in Part I of the Hong Kong Bill.

The untidiness resulting from the rest of Chapter III of the Basic Law is unavoidable. In time the courts will have to reconcile the two sets of provisions. The solution to be hoped for is that the courts will hold that the Hong Kong Bill of Rights gives full effect to Article 39 of the Basic Law and, in reconciling the two sets of provisions, will hold that they should give effect to those which are more extensive on the grounds that both sets of provisions are intended to accord benefits to individuals and not to restrict them.

15 May 1990

Paul Fifoot Legal Advisers

2PFAAB

CONFIDENTIAL