TNAG-2739-FCO40-3953-Future-of-Hong-Kong-constitutional-development--through-tra-1993 — Page 31

NG CHYPTEK

NED IV NOV 93 17:12

PG.02

SECRET

10 November 1993

1. Copm Сори

Mr throm Miss Brooks.

PF Ricketts Esq

HKD

2. Mr Bunke.

FCO

(By classified fax: IMMEDIATE)

We spoke.

dear lever,

British Embassy Peking

11 (nang Mi Lu

legal toh. Jian Cino Men Wai

Ролик

Peking

People's Republe of China

Telephone: 532 1961/2.3, 4-5 Cable: Prodrome Peking

Telex: 22191

Facsimile: 592 1999 ext. 239

7.

TALKS ON 1994/95 ELECTIONS:

THROUGH TRAIN OATH

1. I have read with interest Peter Lai's letter of 9 November and the draft attached to it.

I agree that it would offer a reasonable starting point for a negotiation with the Chinesa.

2.

It is not the role of this Embassy to comment on aspects not bearing directly on the Chinese dimension, but on a personal (nit-picking) basis I had the following detailed comments:

(a) The draft seems rather unbalanced, specifying only points of interest to the Chinese Government. Is there a case for seeking to include specific reference to some of the positive points of the JD? Of course it would be difficult to single out individual provisions regarding rights and freedoms, but is it worth thinking of some reference to Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy and/or to the rule of law, or at least to the laws of the HKSAR?

(b) Rather than "uphold and observe" would not "observe and uphold" be more logical?

(c) What does "uphold the resumption of the exercise of sovereignty" mean? It might be clearer to say "support the resumption..."

(d) Do we need to say "an inalienable part" of the PRC? It sounds like pure rhetoric, with no basis in international law.

(e) Why "refrain from any activities..."? The formula "not engage in", which is used later, sounds more natural.

(f) "Undermining" the principle of one-country, two-systems is a pretty vague and elastic concept. Almost any aspect of the Western way of life can be said to represent a challenge ("peaceful evolution") to whatever is currently called socialism in China. Perhaps one could get round this, at least in our

SECRET