TNAG-2176-FCO40-3113-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-1990 — Page 48

CONFIDENTIAL

044161

68

MOLIAN

SUPREMACY OF THE BOR

5. TONG CONTENDED THAT CLAUSES 3 AND 4 OF THE BOR READ TOGETHER

WOULD IN EFFECT MAKE THE LEGISLATION SUPREME AND THIS WOULD BE A SERIOUS DEPARTURE FROM THE JD. THE BOR, AS NOW DRAFTED, DID NOT MAKE CLEAR ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE BL. IT COULD BE INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT THE BL WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE BOR OR ELSE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REPEALED UNDER CLAUSES 3 AND 4 OF THE LATTER.

6. THE ARTICLES CONCLUDED THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO REASON WHY THE

HONG KONG GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT EXPLICITLY RECOGNISE IN THE BOR THAT THE BL WAS ABOVE THE BOR. SUCH A PROVISION WOULD AT THE VERY LEAST, SERVE THE PURPOSE OF TAKING THE FIRST STEP TO ENABLE THE

BOR TO CONTINUE IN FORCE AFTER 1997.

FORD

YYYY

と

DISTRIBUTION

61

ΜΑΙΝ

57

.HONG KONG AGREEMENT

.(RESTRICTED)

LIMITED

HKD

HD/FED

PUSD

NEWS D

PS/LORD CAITHNESS

MR MCLAREN

MR BURNS

RAD (FE)

ADDITIONAL

MR WHOMERSLEY LEGAL ADVISERS

MS BARRETT LEGAL ADVISERS

NNNN

MR FIFOOT LEGAL ADVISERS MR YAXLEY, HKGO LONDON

PAGE

2

CONFIDENTIAL

Redacted under FOI exemption 27(1)