The letter from Peter Lok (Flight International, 24-30 June) contains mistakes and misrepresentations.
Cathay Pacific is a Hong Kong airline according to definitions in Hong Kong law and bilateral air service agreements. Its two largest shareholders, Swire Pacific and CITIC Pacific, are Hong Kong registered and listed companies. Any British shareholding in these companies is irrelevant. Foreigners are now permitted to hold up to 49% of mainland Chinese airlines.
Peter Lok is wrong in stating that Article 7 of the Chicago Convention would oblige China to accept the designation of aircraft of other contracting states on Hong Kong-mainland routes if it accepts the designation of Cathay Pacific. Without prejudice to the point on shareholding, there are many examples of countries that have awarded cabotage rights selectively: Australia with New Zealand, and the European Union countries with each other, for example.
Article 7 says that these rights should not be granted "exclusively". This means that countries, having granted these rights to one partner, cannot subsequently refuse to consider requests from other partners for similar rights on the basis that these are cabotage. It does not bind them to grant these rights to others. Cathay Pacific has been designated and granted capacity on the Hong Kong-Beijing route; this effectively refutes Mr Lok's line of argument.
His point that the licensing of Cathay Pacific on Hong Kong-mainland routes is contrary to Hong Kong basic law will be subject to a legal challenge by Dragonair in August.
Tony Tyler Director Corporate Development, Cathay Pacific Airways, Hong Kong
Source: Flight International
