CONFIDENTIAL
B
C
D
after that. Ministers have already agreed that we should adopt a case-by-case approach to the handling of the six ordinances. The Chinese do not seem to have reacted (yet) to the publication of (fairly minor) changes last month to two other Ordinances (without consulting them in advance.)
4.
The Societies Ordinance is more sensitive.
Apart from the difficulty in principle which the Chinese have (ie to agree to amendments to local legislation to make them consistent with the BOR, the Chinese would implicitly have
to give up their objections to the BOR), they are bound to take strong exception to the proposal to delete the exisiting provision in Section 6(2) (A) of the Ordinance. This (text attached) allows the Commissioner of Police, after consulting the Chief Secretary, to refuse to register a society if he is satisified that the society is connected with an organisation of a political nature outside Hong
Kong. The Chinese will see the deletion of this power as a
deliberate move to relax Hong Kong's controls on organisations which are in their eyes subversive. Peking expect them to be particularly concerned that the powers to
be retained do not cover local groups (eg, the Hong Kong
Alliance) for the reasons set out in Hong Kong telno 212.
5.
In short, we must expect a strong Chinese reaction. But if HKG do not amend the Ordinance it is very likely to fall
foul to the BOR's provisions on freedom of association. LegCo will not be willing to extend the freeze period. To make amendments (especially the deletion of Section 6(2)
(A)) now is preferable to having the offending provisions
struck down in a high-profile BOR court action later. Given the sensitivity for China, I think that it is right in this
case to brief them in advance so that they are clear that significant controls on societies connected with political organisations outside Hong Kong will still be retained.
FUTACI/2
CONFIDENTIAL
We
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.