Advertisement
Advertisement
Hong Kong extradition bill
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
The Sino-British Joint Declaration was signed on December 19, 1984, by then-premier Zhao Ziyang (right) and Margaret Thatcher (left), the former prime minister of Britain. Photo: Xinhua

Explainer | What is the Sino-British Joint Declaration and what does it have to do with Hong Kong’s extradition crisis?

  • Signed in 1984 after two years of negotiations, the joint declaration was meant to determine Hong Kong’s future
  • Pact is back in the news after British foreign secretary says Beijing must honour it in regard to extradition crisis
The controversy in Hong Kong over the now-suspended extradition bill has spilled to the diplomatic front. British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt on Tuesday warned that China would face serious consequences if it failed to honour the Sino-British Joint Declaration which was signed in 1984.
Hunt’s comments came after Hong Kong was rocked by some of the worst political unrest since its 1997 handover from Britain to China. Protests in the city last month attracted up to 2 million demonstrators who took to the streets to oppose a bill that would allow the transfer of criminal suspects to jurisdictions with which the city does not have fugitive agreements, including mainland China.
Beijing on Wednesday lodged a strong protest with London over Hunt’s warning and accused him of still harbouring “colonial illusions”. British Prime Minister Theresa May later told parliament that she had been in touch with Beijing to raise concerns about the events in Hong Kong.
Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said this week that China must honour the joint declaration, igniting a diplomatic dispute. Photo: AP

What is the Sino-British Joint Declaration?

It is an agreement signed by Britain and China in 1984 to settle the future of Hong Kong. The two governments agreed China would reassume control of Hong Kong, which was occupied by Britain after the Opium War in 1840, from July 1, 1997.

What are the main points of the joint declaration?

The main body of the treaty has eight articles and three annexes. It states that China’s basic policies regarding Hong Kong which “will remain unchanged for 50 years”, including the promise that the city would retain a high degree of autonomy. The basic policies are detailed in Annex I and stipulated in the Basic Law, the city’s mini-constitution that was put into effect by the National People’s Congress in 1990. The declaration also states that Hong Kong’s legal and judicial system would also be unchanged for 50 years after 1997. It held that Britain would be would be responsible for the administration of Hong Kong until 1997 and the Chinese government would give its cooperation. The declaration was later deposited with the United Nations.

Who signed the agreement – and what promises were made?

Margaret Thatcher, the former British prime minister, travelled to China in September 1982 to begin negotiations on Hong Kong’s future. The declaration was signed after two year of talks between the two nations.
China’s vice-minister of foreign affairs at the time, Zhou Nan, and the former British ambassador to China, Sir Richard Evans, signed the draft of the declaration in Beijing on September 26, 1984.

Thatcher and Premier Zhao Ziyang signed the official Sino-British Joint Declaration at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on December 19, 1984.

In a visit to Hong Kong the same month, Thatcher assured the city’s political elite that Britain would take issue with any breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

Her pledge was prepared by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and relayed through informal conversations with Executive Council and the Legislative Council member on December 20, 1984.

“Britain has the right to raise any breaches with China after 1997. We would not hesitate to do so,” the notes said.

The chairman of the Chinese negotiating team, Zhou Nan, and the leader of the British team, Sir Richard Evans, shake hands after signing the draft agreement in Beijing in 1984.

Is there any link between the joint declaration and the Basic Law?

The joint declaration states that Beijing will appoint the chief executive based on the results of “elections or consultations to be held locally”. The declaration promised that local people would administer the Special Administrative Region. In the Basic Law, universal suffrage is said to be the “ultimate aim” in elections for Hong Kong’s chief executive. Some scholars in the mainland have argued that this commitment shows it was Beijing that initiated the wave of democratisation in Hong Kong in the mid-1980s.

Is the joint declaration still valid now that Beijing governs Hong Kong?

The high degree of autonomy that Beijing pledged to grant Hong Kong has been a thorny subject since the 1997 handover. The issue was exacerbated in June 2014 when the State Council released a white paper stating that Beijing had “comprehensive jurisdiction” over Hong Kong.

In November 2014, Ni Jian, China’s deputy ambassador to Britain, told Richard Ottaway, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the House of Commons, that the declaration was “now void and covered only the period from the signing in 1984 until the handover in 1997”.
A month later, Raymond Tam Chi-yuen, Hong Kong’s secretary for constitutional and mainland affairs at the time, said Britain had no right to monitor the implementation of the agreement after 1997. Tam said “the provisions of the joint declaration have been fully implemented and its purpose and objectives have also been fully fulfilled”.

But Hunt, the British foreign secretary, said the agreement remained in effect and was a legally binding agreement that must be honoured.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said Beijing had made “stern representations” over the comments and said Hunt still harboured “colonial illusions”.

“We called on the British side, especially Hunt, to stop being overconfident and grossly interfering in Hong Kong affairs. This is doomed to fail,” Geng said.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: Is Britain meddling or sticking to its legal obligations?
18