regarding Hong Kong, the representative said provided for the establishment of a new Court that the long delay in resolving the case of unrepresentative of what usually happened in &eedom of movement and e-on that the Joint Declaration of Final Appeal after 1991 and an auxiliary policeman was civil cases. of ali= 39G. With reference to that issue, members of the Committee wished to know what the difference between expulsion and exclusion was. Clarification was also requested of the system of “supervised departure”r of the “key people” category permitted to register as British citizens under the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Actr” of the situation of Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong: and of the compatibility with article 14, paragraphs 3 (b), (d) and (f), of the Covenant on the screening and detention procedures for such asylum seekers. 391. In his reply, the representative of the State party said that the “exclusion” power was directed towards ensuring that where grounds for suspicion of involvement in terrorist offences existed, the suspected person might be excluded from the country, subject to the provisions concerning citizenship and residence. Under the system of supervised departure, a person who was in the country unlawfully could, at the authorities’ discretion, leave Anyone who left under such voluntarily as an alternative to being deported. system enjoyed the same status as anyone applying to enter the country. 390. Persons who could apply to be registered as British citizens under the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act would be determined according to a scheme approved by the British Parliament. The question of Vietnamese boat people had posed critical problems for Hong Kong, and the Territory had made a genuine effort to deal fairly with them. It had, however, to be noted that articles 13 and 14 of the Covenant related to those lawfully present in the territory of the State party, which was not the case of the boat people in Hong Kong. However, the Territory continued to deal with the problem in a humane way pending a satisfactory international solution. Criteria for screening and detention procedures had been reviewed with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and were subject to its scrutiny at all stages of the process. Furthermore, several asylum seekers had had recourse to the courts, had been provided with legal aid and had been successful in pursuing their claims. 399. In connection with that issue, members of the Committee wished to receive information on the effectiveness to date of the measures that had been introduced under the Data Protection Act, 1984, to safeguard the privacy of data subjects and wished to know whether the Act was applicable to all dependent territories. In addition, information was requested on the mandate of the security forces under the Security Services Act and concerning the law and practice relating to permissible interference with the right to privacy in Hong Kong. In the latter regard, it was asked what the legal regime was governing lawful interference with telephone and telegraphic communications in Hong Kong and whether such practices were monitored by independent bodies. -99-