TNAG-2325-FCO40-3369-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-policy-1991 — Page 85

42

CONFIDENTIAL

FM HONG KONG

CONFIDENTIAL

HKC241/5

TOP COPY Q DIST?

002160 MDHIAN 5531

fe

видуа

TO DESKBY 08113OZ F C O

TELNO 1424

OF 08105OZ MAY 91

INFO IMMEDIATE PEKING, UKREP JLG HONG KONG

41

YOUR TELNO 871: BILL OF RIGHTS:

(38)

INTERCITIZEN RIGHTS

THANK YOU FOR TUR WE HAVE REFLECTED ON THE FORMULATION SET OUT IN OUR TELNO 1379. OUR CONCERN IS THAT BY INCLUDING AMENDED CLAUSE 7(1)(C) WE MIGHT HAVE CAST THE NET TOO WIDE WITHOUT REALISING ITS FULL IMPLICATIONS AND THEREBY CREATING UNCERTAINTY WHICH WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO MINIMISE FOLLOWING THE DECISION TO REMOVE INTERCITIZEN RIGHTS FROM THE BOR. HAVING SOUNDED OUT THE CONVENOR OF THE LEGCO AD HOC GROUP, OUR ASSESSMENT IS THAT SUCH A FORMULATION MAY INVITE CLOSE SCRUTINY AND A DEBATE ON THE MORE PRECISE SCOPE OF THE BOR. IT SEEMS THAT GIVEN THE VERY TIGHT LEGISLATIVE TIMETABLE, THE MORE PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION IS TO ADHERE TO THE APPROACH CONTAINED IN EXISTING CLAUSE 7(3) AS FAR AS POSSIBLE, THEREBY ABANDONING THE REFERENCE TO THE PERFORMANCE

OF FUNCTIONS OF A PUBLIC NATURE.

2.

AGAINST THIS BACKGROUND, WE ARE THEREFORE IN FAVOUR OF SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF THE FOLLOWING

(1)

THIS ORDINANCE BINDS

-

(A)

THE GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC AUTHORITIES:

AND

(B)

ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNMENT

OR A PUBLIC AUTHORITY.

FOLLOWING THE REPLACEMENT OF THE REFERENCE TO PUBLIC BODIES BY PUBLIC AUTHORITIES, WE DO NOT SEE THE NEED TO RETAIN SUBSECTION (2). IN GOING DOWN THIS ROUTE, WE REALISE THAT THE SCOPE OF THE COVERAGE IS SOMEWHAT REDUCED COMPARED WITH THE EARLIER VERSION.

3. GRATEFUL FOR YOUR COMMENTS ON THE REVISED FORMULATION DESKBY 09010OZ IF POSSIBLE.

WILSON

1

PAGE

CONFIDENTIAL