Setting straight the rights record
ON AN overcast, raw spring morning in an ugly, glass-and-steel structure, questions were asked about a tiny sub-tropical territory with a population of six million half the world away: what of the introduction of the local bill of rights, the possible inconsistencies with an international treaty and the future legal arrangements to which it would give rise? And later, on a rainswept afternoon in a marble-blocked building on the shores of a Swiss lake, more questions were asked. This time they ranged from the basic, such as whether it was the future sovereign or the present regime which drafted the Basic Law, to the esoteric, such as whether Filipino domestics had access to adult education courses.
The first was the examination in April 1991 by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, convening in New York, of a report presented by Britain on its dependencies, including Hong Kong, under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The second was the examination by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ('the Committee') convening in Geneva, of another British report made under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
I was present at both: the first as a non-governmental organisation (NGO) representative and the provider of sometimes awkward (but I would like to think constructive) questions for the British and Hong Kong representatives, the second as defender of the Government's record.
Upon my return last weekend, I was asked rhetorically in a local newspaper's editorial (Sunday Morning Post, November 27) whether the trip had been worthwhile - the inference being the journey was organised as a publicity stunt to impress the UN. Having seen the process from both sides, I am perhaps in a unique position to answer the question posed. And my response, despite the dismal weather present on both occasions, is a resounding 'yes'.
The hearings form a crucial part of the process of international monitoring by the Committee of Britain's compliance with the Covenant.
Hong Kong's role is to assist Britain in the discharge of its periodic reporting obligations so far as they affect the territory. The Hong Kong section of the report, together with written responses to written questions, constitute an accurate and comprehensive summary of the state of economic, social and cultural rights enjoyed in Hong Kong.
Some have criticised the preparation of the report as a 'black box operation', and the final product as lop-sided and misleading. I would like to stress, however, that throughout the preparation of the report and the subsequent written responses, the Government was at all times fully alive to and took into account the views of NGOs and the wider community.