TNAG-2553-FCO40-3728-Hong-Kong-Bill-of-Rights-review-of-legislation-1992 — Page 122

CONFIDENTIAL

(HONG KONG BILL OF RIGHTS: REVIEW OF LEGISLATION)

1.

The reason for consulting Ministers is that the proposed action is likely to lead to another argument with the Chinese and this could spill over into the Secretary of State's meeting with the Chinese Foreign Minister on

9 March.

2.

There is one aspect, not addressed above, which needs to be borne in mind. At the time of the Airport Agreement we agreed to consult the Chinese on major matters straddling 1997. The particular Chinese concern related to matters which might create new rights and obligations for the SAR. If the Chinese quote this back at us in the present case we would say, reasonably in my view, that the action in question is merely a natural consequence of the enactment of the Bill of Rights, a major matter on which we did consult them. We do not regard it as a new "major matter" requiring

consultation.

3.

Otherwise I agree with the action proposed.

foln Lole.

Sir John Coles

10 January 1992

CC:

PS/Lord Caithness

Mr Burns o/r

Mr Davies, FED

Miss Brooks, Legal Advisers

Mr Wye, RAD

JANAAV/1

CONFIDENTIAL