09-SEP-1993 10:08
UKREP EL BRUDJELJ
- 11
Freedom of Communication, including use of diplomatic pouch
43.
agreed to
Mr Brüser said this would be a crucial point for the EC and
the problem was how far the EC could live with an administrative
assurance instead of a legal guarantee. He however
consider the following formulation proposed
delegation:
by
the Hong Kong
Subject to the relevant laws of Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Government will use its best endeavours to ensure
the freedom of communications of
of the EC Office for
official purposes and that the official correspondence of the EC office in Hong Kong will neither be opened
nor detained. Nevertheless, if the competent
authorities of Hong Kong have serious reason to
believe that the correspondence contains something
other than documents
documents or articles intended exclusively
for official use, they may request that the
correspondence be opened in the presence of an authorised representative of the EC Office. If this
request is refused by the authority of the EC office, the correspondence will be returned to its place of origin.
Protection and personal inviolability
44.
Mr Kuijper said this involved a basic problem of principle. He said the executive granting of protection was not the same as legal guarantee and was concerned how protection could be put into operation in practice. He also asked whether there would be a guarantee that officers would be kept free pending trial.
45.
Mr Shum explained that under Hong Kong's legal system, it was possible to apply for bail pending trial except in cases of grave crime.
Besides, police stations also had the power to grant
bail before putting the case o the court.
46.
Mr Brüser noted the formulation proposed by Hong Kong and suggested that the question be discussed again the following day.
/Immunity
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.