CONFIDENTIAL
02 30 MDHOAN 453
Legco.
5.
Several members were interested to learn, given the persistent Chinese allegations that your proposals were in breach of the JD and BL, if we knew of any specific points which in the Chinese view constituted a breach. Chamberlain said that the Chinese had totally failed to substantiate these allegations. There were no legal obligations or agreements to consult the Chinese on the development of democracy in Hong Kong
Hum before introducing proposals into the public domain. summarised the steps we took to give the Chinese side advance briefing before the Governor's October 1992 speech.
6.
In answer to questions on Human Rights after 1997, Chamberlain said that the HK Bill of Rights was compatible with the BL and Article 39 of the BL provided that the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) shall remain in force. China was committed by the JD to report on behalf of the SAR to the UN Human Rights Committee, even if it was not itself a party. He pointed out that the BL provides that
Hong Kong Laws currently in force will remain basically unchanged, and that Chinese national laws will not be applied there except for those listed in Annex III.
7. In answer to questions on a potential legal vacuum after 1997 if the JLG backlog is not cleared, Chamberlain referred to SCA and LO(IL)s question and answer session with LegCo ( a copy of their statement was handed to the committee), and outlined the Asked whether the implications of Lack of progress in this area. Chinese were obliged to cooperate in this area under the terms of the JD, Chamberlain indicated that the JLG had a huge backlog of
If work and that the Chinese side were obliged to cooperate. they failed to do so, they would not really be fulfilling the terms of the JD.
Pressed on the Chinese record in complying with Treaties which they had signed, Chamberlain commented that this was mixed.
8.
LAWYERS PANEL
9.
After the FCO evidence, the FAC sought advice from a panel of Lawyers. These were Mr Peter Duffy, Barrister, Mr Perry Keller of Manchester University Faculty of Law and Br Peter Slinn, Head of Law Department, SOAS. Duffy and Slinn concurred
2
PAGE CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.