TNAG-2177-FCO40-3114-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-1990 — Page 48

In

year freeze period for all pre-existing legislation inconsistent with the aims the Bill of Rights purports to advance. addition, the additional one-year freeze for pre-existing legislation referenced in the Schedule, with its provision for unlimited extension by the Legislative Council, threatens to delay and ultimately deny Hong Kong citizens the full enjoyment

of their rights under the Bill.

As discussed in its June memorandum, the Law Group

believes a blanket freeze of any duration unnecessarily postpones

identification of pre-existing legislation that contravenes the

Bill of Rights. The drafters of the Bill of Rights aver that the

freeze period is necessary to assure that Hong Kong laws comply with the Bill and to prevent the absence of "effective law in certain areas during the time it took for successfully challenged old law to be replaced" Although conflicting legislation may

1

very well exist and has so been noted by some commentators, the method for identifying and reforming such legislation should be as narrow and for as limited a period of time as the public

interest dictates.

Hong Kong's Bill of Rights should allow immediate human

rights protection while still providing opportunity for swift reform of conflicting laws and development of common law precedent. The one-year freeze in the current Bill will not only dampen legislative initiative to reform the laws as quickly as

1 See Commentary on the Draft Hong Kong Bill of Rights

Ordinance 1990 (Government Printer, Hong Kong, March 1990) ("Commentary"), Section 14.

3