THE ORDINANCE WERE SEEN AS AN INDICATION OF THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE

TO WIDE PUBLIC CRITICISM OF THE LEGISLATION.

REACTION

5. THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BAR ASSOCIATION, DENIS CHANG, TOLD TVB ON

SATURDAY THAT AG HAD TRIED TO MAKE THE BEST OUT OF A BAD SITUATION.

MR CHANG FELT THE ORDINANCE SHOULD BE REVIEWED OR REPEALED. **IT

DEMONSTRATES REALLY THE NEED TO HAVE A DEFINITION SECTION FOR IT MUST

BE REMEMBERED THAT THESE GUIDELINES DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW.

THEY ARE USEFUL PENDING A REVIEW, AN AMENDMENT AND A REPEAL OF THE

SECTION,'' MR CHANG SAID. THE SUNDAY MORNING POST QUOTED MR CHANG

AS SAYING THAT GUIDELINES WERE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR GOOD LAW. **THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL HAD TRIED TO MAKE THE BEST OF A BAD LAW BY SETTING

LIMITS TO IT. IN SO DOING HE HAS DEMONSTRATED VERY CLEARLY THE

LEGAL AMBIGUITIES THAT EXIST IN THE ORDINANCE,** HE SAID.

6.

THE HONORARY SECRETARY OF THE BAR ASSOCIATION, DANIEL FUNG, WELCOMED THE GUIDELINES BUT HE FELT THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD

REVIEW THE ORDINANCE, ATV REPORTED ON SATURDAY. MR FUNG'S REMARKS ON THE GUIDELINES WERE ALSO CARRIED IN SOME NEWSPAPER REPORTS

ON SUNDAY. ACCORDING TO MR FUNG, AG AGREED THAT PROSECUTION COULD

BE COMMENCED ONLY IF PUBLIC ALARM OR DISORDER RESULTED FROM THE

PUBLICATION AND THAT THE PUBLICATION HAD BEEN MADE KNOWN TO A WIDER PUBLIC. '':IF THE AG'S VIEWS ARE ACCEPTED AS BEING DESIRABLE VIEWS,

THERE IS NO REASON WHY WE CANNOT PASS AMENDED LEGISLATION TO GIVE

THESE VIEWS THE FORCE OF LAW,'' HE SAID

RADIO-1 REPORTED THAT THE LEGAL ADVISER OF THE HKJA, VINCENT KO, WARNED THAT THESE GUIDELINES HAD NO LEGALLY BINDING FORCE AND SHOULD

NOT BE SEEN AS NARROWING THE SCOPE OF THE LAW.

8. A SPOKESMAN FOR THE HKJA, LAM HON-KEUNG, SAND THE GUIDELINES DID NOT RESOLVE THE PROBLEM OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS, THAT OF DISC-

LOSING A REPORTER'S SOURCES.

3.

MR H.Y. WONG OF THE HK BRANCH OF JUSTICE WELCOMED THE GUIDELINES AS THESE COULD SAFEGUARD THE PUBLIC INTEREST, COMMERCIAL RADIO-C REPORTED ON SATURDAY. MR WONG ASKED FOR A CLEARER DEFINITION OF THE TERM ''PUBLIC'' IN UTHE ORDINANCE AND SAID THAT THERE WERE CONTRAD-

ICTIONS BETWEEN THE ORDINANCE AND THE GUIDELINES,

10. OMELCO MEMBER, MARIA TAM, A MEMBER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION, WAS QUOTED BY THE SCMP TODAY AS SAYING THAT THE CONTROVERSIAL

**FALSE NEWS' SECTION SHOULD BE REVIEWED BEFORE 1997. THE PAPER SAID MISS TAM, WHO VOTED FOR THE BILL IN LEGCO ON 11 MARCH, SAID SHE HAD SUPPORTED THE MEASURES ON THE BASIS THAT SHE BELIEVED THEY

WOULD EVENTUALLY BE **WATERED DOWN'' BY THE ADMINISTRATION. MISS

TAM TOLD THE PAPER THAT THE GOVERNMENT COULD ACT ONCE IT DETERMINED

WHAT LEVEL OF PROTECTION THE **PUBLIC ORDER REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE ORDINANCE. BUT SHE DEFENDED THE DECISION TO INTRODUCE

THE SANCTIONS AGAINST PUBLICATION OF THE SO-CALLED **FALSE NEWS'',

THE PAPER SAID. ''THERE IS A BASIC RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PRESS TO

REPORT THE TRUTH. HT IS ON THE UNITED NATIONS' DECLARATION ON HUMAN

RESTRICTED

IRIGHTS

Share This Page