TNAG-2815-FCO40-4061-Future-of-Hong-Kong-International-Rights-and-Obligations-(IR-1993 — Page 188

From:

Miss S Brooks

Legal Counsellor

MKC 031/10

Date: 1 September 1993

、 SEP 1993

CC: Mr Morris, HKD

Ms Paris. HKD

(43

IMF/IBRD:-

1.

HONG KONG 1997 ANNUAL MEETINGS

You have asked me for advice regarding the issue of visas and privileges and immunities in connection with the holding of annual meetings of the IMF/World Bank which are to be held in Hong Kong after 1 July 1997. It seems that the meetings will

be held in September 1997.

The issue of visas to delegates attending the meetings is a matter for the HKSAR Government after 1 July 1997.

2.

provides that the HKSAR Government may apply immigration controls on entry, stay in and departure from the HKSAR by persons from foreign states and regions.

3.

The question of privileges and immunities raises rather more difficult questions. The privileges and immunities would presumably be those set out on page 2, paragraph 3 of the draft Memorandum of Understanding. They are those which would be accorded by the Articles of Agreement of the IBRD and IMF and by the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the Specialised Agencies. It was agreed with the Chinese side in 1989 that the IMF and IBRD agreements would continue to apply to the HKSAR after 1 July 1997. The HKSAR would therefore be obliged to accord privileges and immunities in accordance with those agreements. There would be no obligation to grant other privileges and immunities. There should, in fact, already be Hong Kong legislation to implement in Hong Kong the privileges and immunities accorded by the agreements. A problem may arise with privileges and immunities conferred by the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of Specialised Agencies since, I believe, that the Convention which is to do with specialised agencies of the UN will not be applied to Hong Kong after 1 July 1997. The HKSAR Government could agree, nevertheless, to confer privileges and immunities of the kind set out in the Convention specifically for the meetings, but might need to pass legislation in order to be able to implement them.

4. The real problem comes with the conclusion of the Memorandum of Understanding. (In fact it looks more like an agreement than an MOU since it is in binding language). Strictly speaking, it should be between the Government of the SARG, and the IMF and IBRD. The Memorandum is about practical

/measures

1