TNAG-2176-FCO40-3113-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-1990 — Page 69

1

1

- 7

jurisdictions relating to the ICCPR to help interpret and

apply the Bill of Rights. We have therefore decided it is

unnecessary to retain Clause 2 (3)(b) of the White Bill.

13.

During the public consultation, a number of

representations asked whether it was necessary to include

a public emergency clause. We have retained the Clause as

it is desirable that there

there should be provisions on the

circumstances under which derogation from the Bill will be

permissible, as provided under the ICCPR.

14.

There has been criticism on Clause 6(1) of the

White Bill which characterised a breach of the Bill of

Rights as a tort. Some people argued that a tort action,

which if successful normally leads to a remedy in damages,

would be inappropriate in some cases for a breach of Bill

of Rights. We believe that there is some force in the

argument and have now deleted this provision. In our

view, Clause 6 as now drafted is sufficient to enable

courts and tribunals to grant an effective remedy in

respect of breaches of the Bill of Rights and will enable

damages to be awarded when it is appropriate and just to

do so.

15.

The obligations of individuals to each other

proposed in Clause 7 of the White Bill have caused concern

in

the business

sector.

They have reservations as to