Select Committee on Foreign Affairs Written Evidence


Letter to Kit Dawnay, Committee Specialist, from the Parliamentary Relations and Devolution Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 24 May 2004

DEVELOPMENTS IN HONG KONG SINCE ELECTIONS IN NOVEMBER 2003

  Thank you for your letter of 22 April asking for the FCO's comments on developments in Hong Kong since the elections of 24 November 2003. I attach these comments, as requested.

Matthew Hamlyn

Parliamentary Relations and Devolution Department

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

24 May 2004

Annex 1

SUMMARY

  Since the District Council elections of last year there have been several unexpected developments in the debate about democracy and constitutional issues in Hong Kong. There were two such developments in particular. The first was the decision by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPSCS) on 6 April to "interpret" the Basic Law. This prepared the way for a second decision on 26 April to set limits on constitutional developments in Hong Kong. There were demonstrations in support of greater democratisation on 1 January (100,000 people) and 7 April (10,000 people).

  HMG's position on constitutional development in Hong Kong has not changed; we have consistently stated that we hope to see early progress towards the Basic Law's ultimate aims of universal suffrage (for the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council) at a pace in step with the aspirations of the people of Hong Kong.

  Mr Rammell's two statements in April and recent answers to Oral Parliamentary Questions in the Lords and Commons have made clear HMG's concern that the decision by the NPCSC appears to be inconsistent with the high degree of autonomy which Hong Kong is guaranteed under the Joint Declaration.

  The Prime Minister raised Hong Kong with Premier Wen Jiabao on 10 May. Both Governments reaffirmed their commitments to the implementation of the Joint Declaration and agreed that it is in the interests of both sides to maintain and promote Hong Kong's prosperity and stability in accordance with the "one country, two systems" principle and the Basic Law. We agreed to continue our exchange of views on these issues.

  The Foreign Secretary's next Six Monthly Report to Parliament on Hong Kong (January to June 2004) will include a detailed account of these developments and HMG's responses.

DETAIL

  On 7 January 2004 (developments between 24 November and the end of December were covered in the last Six Monthly Report to Parliament) the Hong Kong Chief Executive announced the setting up of a Constitutional Development Task Force headed by the Chief Secretary to examine the Basic Law's provisions on constitutional reform and to collect the views of different sectors of the Hong Kong Community. However, before the Task Force had completed its consultation process the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC), between 2-6 April, took the initiative to interpret two aspects of the Basic Law (effectively Hong Kong's constitution) dealing with the procedures for changing the election methods for the Chief Executive (from 2007) and the Legislative Council (from 2008). This was only the second time since the handover that the NPCSC had conducted an interpretation of Hong Kong's Basic Law; and the first time since then to have done so on their own initiative.

  Although the NPCSC "interpretation", made public on 6 April, did not rule out changes to the electoral process in 2007 the real new element was that any change to either the election of the Chief Executive or the Legislative Council had first to be proposed by the Chief Executive and then cleared by the NPCSC before any amendment to the Basic Law could be introduced. Previously, the relevant provision in the Basic Law had merely stated that "if there is a need to amend the method" (for selecting the Chief Executive or electing the Legislative Council) "such amendments must be made with the endorsement of a two-thirds majority of all members of the Legislative Council and the consent of the Chief Executive, and they shall be reported to the NPCSC for the record."

  Mr Rammell issued the following statement on 7 April expressing concern that the interpretation appeared to have eroded the high degree of autonomy that was guaranteed under the terms of the Joint Declaration and which underpins Hong Kong's stability and prosperity:

    We understand that the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) has the ultimate authority to interpret the Basic Law. However, we are concerned that they should have taken the initiative to offer an interpretation on this issue. We also share the concern in Hong Kong that the procedure set out by the NPCSC requiring a submission from The Chief Executive adds a further step to the procedure set out in the Annexes to the Basic Law. This appears to us to erode the high degree of autonomy which is guaranteed under the terms of the Joint Declaration and which underpins Hong Kong's stability and prosperity. We hope that the NRC will take account of these concerns.

    We believe that it is now important for the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government to continue its consultation of Hong Kong people and come foward soon with concrete proposals for constitutional development in line with the Basic Law and the wishes of the people of Hong Kong.

    We have always said that we would like to see early progress towards the Basic Law's aim of universal suffrage for the election of the Chief Executive and Legislative Council at a pace in line with the wishes of the people of Hong Kong. We note that it is confirmed that changes in the electoral system is possible under the Basic Law in time for the 2007 elections.

    We shall continue to monitor closely the implications of these developments for the implementation of the Joint Declaration, including Hong Kong's legislative and judicial power.

  The Joint Declaration has made no specific provisions relating to the precise electoral procedures for the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council. It does, however, provide that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in Foreign and defence affairs which are the responsibility of the Central People's Government.

  On 26 April, following a report from the Hong Kong SAR Government to Beijing, the NPCSC gave a "decision" on the issue of whether Hong Kong should be allowed to change the election method for the Chief Executive in 2007 and for Legislative Council in 2008. The NPCSC decided that the method could be changed, but explicitly stated that universal suffrage in 2007-08 would not be allowed. It also ruled that the system of forming Legislative Council to be used in the 2004 elections (50% of seats elected by "functional constituencies" and 50% directly elected) could be adapted, but that the ratio of functional to directly elected seats must remain the same.

  The NPC "decision" is a cause for concern and we responded rapidly to this development. Mr Rammell issued the following statement on 26 April expressing our concern and disappointment at the NPCSC decision:

    This decision seems to us to be inconsistent with the "high degree of autonomy" which Hong Kong is guaranteed under the Joint Declaration.

    I am also disappointed that the NRC has set limits to constitutional development in Hong Kong that are not required by the Basic Law, especially before the Hong Kong Government has completed its consultation and put forward proposals for development.

    I shall be meeting today with the Chinese Ambassador to express our concerns to the Chinese authorities.

    We look forward to seeing the proposals that the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government (HKSARG) comes forward with in the light of this decision. We continue to hope that early progress can be made towards the Basic Law's ultimate aims of the election of the Chief Executive and all members of the Legislative Council by universal suffrage, at a pace in line with the wishes of the people of Hong Kong.

    We will continue to follow events in Hong Kong closely. We value the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong, which is of great benefit to both China and the UK.

  We have made our concerns clear to the Chinese authorities through Mr Rammell's statements and at his meeting with the Chinese Ambassador on 26 April. Peter Hain also raised these issues with Hong Kong's Chief Executive and the Chinese vice-Foreign Minister during his visit to the region last month.

  In a Reuters interview on 29 April Premier Wen Jiabao publicly confirmed the Basic Law's ultimate aim was the election of the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council by universal suffrage. The Prime Minister discussed Hong Kong with Premier Wen Jiabao during his visit to the UK earlier this month. In a Joint Statement the UK and China reaffirmed our commitments to the implementation of the 1984 Joint Declaration and agreed it was in the best interests of Hong Kong to maintain and promote Hong Kong's prosperity and stability in accordance with the "one country, two systems" principle and the Basic Law. We agreed to continue our exchange of views. At the press conference with Premier Wen on 10 May the Prime Minister emphasised this point saying "We agreed our commitment as co-signatories to the Joint Declaration to stability, prosperity and a high degree of autonomy for Hong Kong. We've agreed to take forward our dialogue in a spirit of co-operation."

  The Hong Kong Constitutional Development Task Force released its third report on 11 May, setting out the possible scope of amendments to the methods of selecting the Chief Executive in 2007 and Legislative Council in 2008 within the scope of the NPCSC "decision". For the Chief Executive election, potential amendments include the size and composition of the Electoral Committee and the delineation and size of its electorate. For the Legislative Council, possible changes include the number of Functional and Geographical Constituencies (though in equal proportion). The Task Force also announced a three-month consultation period, to be concluded by 31 August.

  We continue to follow developments in Hong Kong closely and will continue to raise our concerns if it appears to us that the high degree of autonomy guaranteed under the terms of the Joint Declaration is being eroded.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 8 April 2005