Book contents
- Reviews
- Treaty for a Lost City
- Treaty for a Lost City
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Table of Provisions in the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong S.A.R.
- Part I 1982–1997
- Part II 1997–2014
- Introduction to Part II
- 4 The Court and the Canaries in a Storm
- 5 Foreign Treaty Relations
- 6 Acts of State, Foreign Affairs, Defence
- 7 Demos
- Part III 2014–2021
- Book part
- Index
Introduction to Part II
from Part II - 1997–2014
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2022
- Reviews
- Treaty for a Lost City
- Treaty for a Lost City
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- Table of Provisions in the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong S.A.R.
- Part I 1982–1997
- Part II 1997–2014
- Introduction to Part II
- 4 The Court and the Canaries in a Storm
- 5 Foreign Treaty Relations
- 6 Acts of State, Foreign Affairs, Defence
- 7 Demos
- Part III 2014–2021
- Book part
- Index
Summary
Part II begins with the UK’s failure to secure a role for the Hong Kong judiciary in relation to the 1984 Joint Declaration. Part I had discussed the idea during the negotiations of subjecting amendments to the Basic Law to the judgment of an ‘international commission’, where Geoffrey Howe had considered it to be a non-starter. Instead, there was an attempt to have the Basic Law’s terms dictated in detail by the terms of the Joint Declaration resulting in a short statement of China’s ‘basic policies’ in paragraph 3 in the main body of the Joint Declaration, a more detailed ‘elaboration’ of these in Annex I and a clause in paragraph 3 (paragraph 3(12)) stating that both these basic policies and their elaboration will ‘be stipulated’ in ‘a Basic Law’ and will remain unchanged for fifty years.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Treaty for a Lost CityThe Sino-British Joint Declaration, pp. 79 - 80Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022