TNAG-2872-FCO40-4126-Hong-Kong-repatriation-of-ex-China-Vietnamese-illegal-immigr-1993 — Page 8

11 November 1993

R Godfrey Esq

SEAD

FCO

ра

p.a. 341/2.

HKC 341/2

RECEN

TO NO. 1993

United Kingdom Mission

To the Office of the

United Nations and Other

International Organisations at Geneva

131-9 Rue de Vermont, 1211 Geneva 20 fon Taken

Telephone: 734 38 00

Telex: 414195 (a/b 414195 UKGV CH)

Facsimile: 734 52 54

43

Den Riva

VIETNAMESE MIGRANTS: UN WORKING GROUP ON ARBITRARY DETENTION

1.

I delivered the Thank you for your letter of 28 October. UK/Hong Kong response to Isaac Bitter of the Centre for Human Rights on 10 November. Bitter is responsible for Secretariat services to the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.

2. As agreed in our telephone conversation of 4 November, I did not include the separate comments from Hong Kong on the errors and inaccuracies in the NGOs' submission as part of our formal response, given that the submission was not itself mentioned in the Chairman of the Working Group's letter to us, and given that we only received a copy of the submission (from UNHCR (HK)) on an unofficial basis. Instead I gave a copy of the Hong Kong comments to Bitter informally, explaining that I hoped they might be considered on an unofficial basis in the Working Group's consideration of this matter. Bitter saw no problem with this suggestion (indeed he was not in the least surprised that we had seen a copy of the NGOs' submission).

3. I asked Bitter about next steps in the Working Group's handling of this matter. He said that as a first step our response would be sent to the originator of the communication (the NGOs), who would be given 90 days to make any comments on it.

The next meeting of the Working Group would be from 1-10 December, when the Working Group's report to the next session of the Commission on Human Rights (February/March 1994) would be finalised. Because of the need to wait for the NGO comments and for the Working Group to consider the issues properly, all that would be noted in this report would be that a communication had been received concerning Hong Kong and that the UK had responded.

4. The substance of this matter would be considered by the Working Group at its meeting in May 1994. The report of the Working Group to the 1995 session of the Commission on Human Rights would contain a summary of the allegations and of our reply, together with a record of the Working Group's views and conclusions (in particular on whether or not the Working Group considered the detention to have been arbitrary). Bitter thought it "possible" that the Committee would use the opportunity of this communication to make some form of