TNAG-2487-FCO40-3618-Future-relations-between-Hong-Kong-and-China-1992 — Page 140

CONFIDENTIAL

with an important degree of stability.

PROPOSED COMPOSITION OF THE COURT OF FINAL APPEAL IS

INCONSISTENT WITH THE JOINT DECLARATION (CONCLUSION 27)

- We do not believe that the agreement reached by the JLG on the Court of Final Appeal is inconsistent with the Joint

Declaration (JD). Since the JD provides that the CFA may "as required invite judges from other common law jurisdictions to sit". It does not say that the court may as it requires invite judges. This is clearly an objective

decision and does not give an unfettered discretion to the

court.

BASIC LAW INCONSISTENT WITH THE JOINT DECLARATION

(CONCLUSIONS 43-45).

- On the whole, the Basic Law is an acceptable reflection of

the Joint Declaration, though there are inevitably some

provisions which we would have preferred to have seen

drafted differently.

The ICJ believe that the lack of a map attached to the Basic Law leaves ambiguity as to whether all of the New Territories would be included in the Special Administrative

or delete Region. We do no accept that other references in the BL (BL 40 and BL 121 and 122) make clear that it will apply to

the New Territories. At present, negotiations are

continuing with the Guangdong Government on the details of Hong Kong's boundaries. It is unreasonable to expect a map

to be published until these are completed.

On other areas of the Basic Law referred in the report,

the Hong Kong Government have made the following comments.

BL 17 and 19 do not over-restrict the jurisdiction of Hong Kong courts since, as local courts are inevitably subject to a territoral limitation.

RB2ACL/3

CONFIDENTIAL