TNAG-2493-FCO40-3625-Future-of-Hong-Kong-constitutional-development-Chinese-reac-1992 — Page 172

CODE 18-77

RESTRICTED

Reference

17

کیا

Mr Bunke

R__41

аре

Mr Ricketts

CHINESE REACTION TO THE GOVERNOR'S CONSTITUTIONAL PROPOSAL

1.

2/10

I attach a copy of a cutting from today's SCMP, which gives in full the Chinese commentary on the diplomatic exchanges on the Basic Law.

2.

I do not think that the Chinese have made the best case that

they might in answer to our own commentary. I presume that we will not wish to enter into a public exchange with the Chinese on our differences, however, I think it might be worth analysing their arguments so that we might best refute them in conversations with third parties.

3. The Chinese have relied upon a section in their February 8th letter which says that "the provisions on the composition and ration of the Electoral Committee as specified in paragraph 2 of Annex I of the Basic Law must be followed in terms of (the Election Committee's) proportional composition". They seem to claim that the fact that Annex I says that the election of the Chief Executive should be by secret ballot is an adequate response to our proposal that the Election Committee for LegCo should operate through a secret ballot.

3.

This is easily refuted in two ways:

(i) (as pointed out in our commentary) the Basic Law says that the first LegCo Election Committee will not be set out on the lines of Annex I and

n

(ii) the Basic Law says that the Election roles for the LegCo Election Committees shall be set out in a law to be passed by the SAR Legislature. Since we were discussing with the Chinese not only the first LegCo but subsequent ones, this proviso means that the Basic Law permits the SAR LegCo to legislate for an Election Committee quite outside the five principals proposed by us.

RA5But.

RAJ Bunten

Hong Kong Department

WH 305

270 2655

30 October 1992

CC

Mr Morris Ms Saunders

ма

W

'ye

RAD (FE).

01214

RESTRICTED