TNAG-2333-FCO40-3394-Future-of-Hong-Kong-Hong-Kong-Court-of-Final-Appeal-Hong-Ko-1991 — Page 85

را

uncontroversial.

It would implement an existing policy,

to which we are committed in the Sino-British Joint

Declaration of 1984, and which is widely welcomed in Hong Kong. It in no way compares to the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill which was passed in the last session in its controversial nature either in Hong Kong or the UK.

The Bill is also unlikely to cause difficulties with the Chinese. The Chinese agree with the establishment of

a Court of Final Appeal and would therefore expect us to

be enacting such legislation. We are well advanced in negotiations with the Chinese on the details of the Court and hope to resolve remaining differences soon. We have

stressed our wish to establish the Court in 1992 or at

least four years before the transfer of sovereignty to

allow it to gain working experience. If we reach agreement with the Chinese and then are unable to establish the Court because our own legislation is not in

place, this would go down badly in Hong Kong and do great damage to our credibility with the Chinese.

For these reasons I should be grateful if the Future Legislation Committee would now agree that there should

be provision in the 1991/92 programme for the Hong Kong

(Appeals) Bill.

The European Communties (Amendment) Bill

I continue to attach the highest priority to this Bill, which was included by FLG on a contingency basis. The aim of the Bill is to ratify the treaty on Political

Union which is likely to emerge from the

Inter-Governmental Conference. It is still too early to

give a firm assessment on timing but negotiations are unlikely to be concluded before the Maastricht European