Immunity ruling by Standing Committee does present some problems for HK

I share some of the sentiments expressed by Philip Bowring in his column ('Damaging blow to our lifeblood', September 4), although it requires clarification.

It is not correct to say that the ruling of the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) in the Congo case applies to any immunity that may be accorded to the Central People's Government or Chinese state-owned entities or that the sovereign immunity policy of the PRC extends to a foreign state-owned entity as opposed to a foreign government. But, his concern about the potential impact of the ruling on Hong Kong's desirability as a venue for resolving commercial disputes is a valid one.

The central government represents, as it should, the whole of the country including Hong Kong. Now that it is clear the issue of sovereign immunity is a matter of foreign affairs and is to be granted in accordance with China's foreign policy, it becomes imperative that Hong Kong's views and interests are taken into account in formulating that policy.

With absolute immunity now accorded to foreign governments, Hong Kong has effectively put up a sign saying we are closed for business when it comes to doing business with a foreign government such as any sovereign borrowing. Not surprisingly, some commentators say other jurisdictions in the region such as Singapore are ready to step in to fill the void. Absolute immunity therefore does not sit well with China's stated policy for Hong Kong to remain an international financial centre. Bowring's comment on Lau Nai-keung is also understandable. Mr Lau has argued for NPCSC's authority to interpret Basic Law. Surely, as a local delegate to the NPC, his primary responsibility is to represent the will of the local community and to ensure that its views and concern are reflected in the formulation of national laws and policy which affect Hong Kong by the national legislature and the central government.

He should spend some time listening to the views of the local community.

Looking ahead, it should be entirely possible for the central government to revisit its immunity policy given it is a signatory of the 2004 UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property which it has yet to ratify. If Mr Lau can play a constructive role in that process, it will be a valuable service to the city he represents.