TNAG-2175-FCO40-3112-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-1990 — Page 238

CONFIDENTIAL

authority for deciding

- 6

機密

whether local laws are consistent

with the Bill is the Judiciary, not the Administration or the Legislature. Some have suggested that there should be no freeze period at all.

13.

avoid the

The

The purpose of a freeze is to destabilising effects of legislative and operational vacuums which may occur if statutory laws are found to be invalid and, if for practical reasons, there are substantial delays before they can be replaced. Administration has undertaken to make use of the proposed freeze period to review existing legislation and to amend legislation which is likely to be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights. The LegCo Ad Hoc Group was not convinced that there would be the time or resources to review the contents of all Hong Kong statutes deserving attention in a two-year period. It also felt that an element of uncertainty would in

in any

event remain as ultimately the issue of compatibility with the Bill of Rights is still a matter of judicial interpretation.

14.

that

The LegCo Ad Hoc Group has therefore recommended "there should be a selective freeze for one year achieved by listing in a schedule Ordinances likely to be affected by the Bill of Rights. The freeze period can be extended, upon the approval of the Legislative Council for another year. If a schedule is adopted, the Administration will have to indicate clearly the specific relevant clauses/sections of certain ordinances which need to be frozen and therefore put on to the schedule. The inclusion should be

certain criteria defined and

justified."

governed

by

CONFIDENTIAL #2

機密

6