:
:
6.
On the 1st December 1980, the Secretary of the Board of
Review informed the Manager of my company by letter that our
appeal against the decision of the Panel of Film Censors to ban
the film had been refused. A copy of this letter of the Board of
Review is now produced and shown to me marked "NSY-7".
7.
On the 11th December 1980, my company informed the
Board of Censors that we were to submit a revised version of the
said movie to the Board of Censors for approval. A copy of such
a letter is now produced and shown to me marked "NSY-8".
Before
such re-submission and after the Board of Censors earlier
decision to ban the said movie, I had cut another 1,000 feet from
films of the said movie. The entire story-line of the said movie
was changed, As a result, the said movie was re-shot and
re-arranged.
The re-shooting of the said movie took about three
weeks to complete. Subsequent to that the whole movie was
re-edited before its submission to the said Authority for
approval.
8.
The Board of Censors viewed the revised version of the
said movie on the 29th January 1981. Again it decided to refuse
The said approval of the said movie for exhibition in Hong Kong.
Authority informed me of this decision by a letter dated the
29th January 1981. A copy of the said letter is now produced
and shown to me marked "NSY-9". By a letter dated the 2nd of
February 1981 which is now produced and shown to me marked
"NSY-10" my company requested for a written reason for the
Board's decision in refusing to approve the exhibition of the
said movie in Hong Kong.
9.
On the 3rd February 1981, Mr. Pierre Lebrun wrote to
the manager of my company setting out similar reasons as he did
in his letter dated the 6th October 1980 for the Board of
Appeal's decision. Mr. Lebrun's letter of the 3rd February 1981
is now produced and shown to me marked "NSY-11",
Page 15Page 16