TNAG-2333-FCO40-3394-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Hong-Kong-Court-of-Final-Appeal-Hong-Ko-1991 — Page 118

RESTRICTED COVERING CONFIDENTIAL

C D

E

5

background to the Hong Kong (Appeals) Bill.

As this makes

clear, it is essential that we secure a slot in the 1991/2 programme if the timetable for the establishment of the

Court of Final Appeal is not to slip.

4.

The

We have consulted the Governor and Mr Galsworthy on the consequences should we be unable to reverse the decision

(FCO telno 163). Their replies (UKREP JLG telno 19 and

Hong Kong telno 262) indicate that the consequences would be

"disastrous" from the point of view of negotiation with the Chinese and damaging for our timetable in Hong Kong. Governor thinks that we could just meet our deadline if the

legislation were enacted very early in the 1992/93 session

but that it would be unwise to cut things so fine. The

Governor adds that it is difficult to see how the

legislation is likely to be controversial.

5.

The Lord President's letter does not explain why the FLG

reached their conclusion. We believe however that Ministers

on the Committee sensed an aura of controversiality about the Bill (as a Hong Kong measure) which led them to shy away

from it. If we do not put right this misconception and

stress the urgency and importance of the Bill, the chances of securing its enactment will be severely jeopardised.

a

Minister

6. It may be necessary for Lerd Caithness to attend the Committee on 29 January or to have a separate bilateral meeting with Lord President to argue this point.

TOMBAB/2

ARPanc

AR Paul

Inlay by apple.

سبة المشاة

RESTRICTED COVERING CONFIDENTIAL

2411