TNAG-2721-FCO40-3927-Hong-Kong-elections-nationality-restrictions-1993 — Page 73

23 August 1992

SECRET

Сову не

- Mr Brooks, legal Adviser,

Mr Wye, RAAD

British Embassy Peking

Miss Saunder

Peter Lai Esq

Mr Jute.

for observations, pfe.

Deputy Secretary for Constitutional Affairs

Government Secretariat

HONG KONG

II don't find His ver

4hr 1530 Vocal

(By classified fax: PRIORITY)

attractive

для

23/813

!! Guang Hua In

Jian Guo Men Wai Peking

People's Republic of China

Telephone: 532 1961 2 445 Cabir. Prodrome Peking

Telex: 22191

Facsimile: 532 1949 ext. 285

HKB 011/7/!

Dear Peter,

2

DESECRA

INDE

PA

*EGISTRY

Taken

TALKS ON 1994/95 ELECTIONS:

NATIONALITY

1.

Thank you for your letter of 13 August

grad that it

has been possible to look further into this, even though the answer is not the one we would have wished.

2. In briet it now seems that it would probably not be possible for the Chinese to agree to turn to a blind eye to any passing of the 20% ceiling in the 1995-99 Legco, since any disgruntled individual could bring a legal challenge.

3. In these circumstances I wonder whether it is worth considering whether we should modify our approach. I think that we are already agreed that it is no longer satisfactory just to dismiss BL67 as "a problem for the Chinese"; it also poses a problem for our professed objective of a through train, with tickets inspected in accordance with acceptable, objective criteria which must be made known before 1995.

4.

In the case of the qualification about upholding the Basic Law, we have not only asked the Chinese what criteria they envisage: we have also made our own proposal. I wonder whether we should not now do the same in the case of the nationality qualification.

5. What I have in mind is that we should tell the Chinese in Round 10 or 11 that we have considered their points about BL67. For the reasons we have already explained it is not possible for us to implement this rule in 1995, Arrangements to implement it in 1999 would be a matter for the SAR/Chinese side. We have no reason to expect that in practice the 20% ceiling will be exceeded in the Legco elected in 1995. But we accept that we cannot be certain about this and (as the Foreign Secretary warned in 1990) it could pose a problem for continuity/the through train. To minimise uncertainty it would be better to make public now, and in any case before the 1995 elections, that the Preparatory Committee would handle such a problem in a fair

SECRET