JOYCE NG JOYCE.NG@SCMP.COM
PUBLISHED : Friday, 19 December, 2014, 12:08pm
UPDATED : Friday, 19 December, 2014, 3:56pm
Maria Tam Wai-chu questions "the focus" of outside monitoring of the implementation of the Joint Declaration. Photo: Sam Tsang
Veteran politicians familiar with the pre-handover negotiations are split on the government’s controversial interpretation of the Joint Declaration – officially signed 30 years ago today.
In a radio show this morning, they argued over whether Beijing’s promise to keep the city’s way of life intact for 50 years, written into the 1984 treaty between Britain and China, was only a pledge by the Chinese over which Britain has no right to monitor.
On Wednesday, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen told lawmakers that Britain has “no moral duty” towards its former colony.
Maria Tam Wai-chu, a former executive councillor who sat on the Basic Law drafting committee, said: “If there are people who want to come to Hong Kong to investigate or monitor the implementation of the Joint Declaration for the political reform issue, it is out of the focus.”
She was referring to an inquiry by British lawmakers into the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration – against the backdrop of the Occupy protests and battle over political reform – infuriated Beijing, who say the city’s affairs are a domestic matter.
Today it is the 30th year since the declaration was signed.
Tam said that “time was running out” and there was no discussion on whether to put details of electoral reform into the declaration.
People should look at the Basic Law, and not the 1984 treaty, for the reform policy, she said.
She agreed with the minister’s view, referring to Article 3 of the treaty, which states that certain basic policies of the People’s Republic of China towards Hong Kong, including rights and freedoms for Hongkongers, “will remain unchanged for 50 years”.
She said that was “China’s own declaration”.
“There are three kinds of declarations [in the Joint Declaration]. A first is China’s own declaration, second is Britain’s, and a third is declarations by both.”
But Allen Lee Peng-fei, who was a lawmaker when the Sino-British Joint Declaration was being negotiated, disagreed.
He referred to Article 7, which said both countries “agreed to implement” all preceding articles, which included the no-change-in-50-years pledge.
He recalled local executive councillors were anxious to see the treaty registered with the United Nations. “After consulting international law experts, the councillors agreed that the UN registration would increase the binding power of the treaty on the states,” he said.
Lee lamented that there was a lack of mutual trust between Beijing and Hongkongers.
He also mentioned the State Council’s white paper issued this year, which was widely seen as undermining “one country, two systems” and said Beijing had “comprehensive jurisdiction” over the city.
“If Beijing used wording in the white paper back then when I was a lawmaker, I would find it very difficult to persuade Hong Kong people to accept the paper,” he said.
Martin Lee Chu-ming, who was also on the Basic Law drafting committee, also criticised Beijing for trying to rule over everything in Hong Kong.
http://m.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/665434/veteran-hong-kong-politicians-conflict-over-joint-declaration
