TNAG-2553-FCO40-3728-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-review-of-legislation-1992 — Page 118

CONFIDENTIAL

A

Rights were to be reviewed, and if necessary amended.

6. This review is now well advanced and swift legislative action is becoming necessary. HKG have identified three options for dealing with the Chinese regarding the amending ordinances which will be necessary:

(a) consulting the Chinese in advance: this is the safest

option in terms of our relations with the Chinese and consistent with what we said to them when trying to win

their support for the draft BOR. But because of Chinese

opposition to the BOR, they would almost certainly feel obliged to oppose the amendments. In any case the pace of

consultation in the JLG is such that at least some of the

amending bills could probably not be introduced into LegCo

before the expiry of the freeze. (Indeed it would be in China's interests to drag out the consultation procedure.)

(b) informal briefing: UKREP JLG or HKG could inform the

Chinese of the proposed amendments shortly before

production: But the Chinese would see this as insufficient

and would demand that there be consultations before the

amending bills are put before LegCo.

(c) not informing the Chinese at all before publication, but briefing them fully if they enquire thereafter. The

advantage of this course is that it safeguards the position

that legislative amendments are a matter for HKG and LegCo.

However, the Chinese would resent our acting unilaterally

and they would probably object quite strongly.

7. HKG favour proceeding case-by-case. They already have

draft amendments ready for two ordinances concerning

corruption (the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance and the

Independent Commission against Corruption Ordinance).

FUTABG/3

These

CONFIDENTIAL