CONFIDENTIAL
ANNEX D(7)
STERLING SAFEGUARDS
Decision to leave the matter until closer to 1997
1. In other Dependent Territories where British rule was coming to an end, arrangements for HMOCS officers were negotiated and announced only shortly before independence. This practice could be used as a precedent to argue for leaving arrangements for Hong Kong HMOCS officers to be settled much nearer 1997.
2. On the other hand (and quite apart from policy considerations) there are difficulties about relying on this precedent:
(a)
(b)
Hong Kong's situation is unique in that the date of the constitutional change and the arrangements for it have been settled many years in advance. other territories the date and arrangements for independence were settled only a short period in advance. There is no precedent therefore for a lengthy separation between announcements on constitutional arrangements and those for HMOCS.
In the other territories HMOCS arrangements were usually negotiated with the
successor-government-in-waiting as part of the wider independence negotiation and concluded before the constitutional documents were signed. This gave HMG more leverage than in the Hong Kong case, where the Joint Declaration is already signed.
NC3AAB
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.