CONFIDENTIAL
FM HONG KONG
TO PRIORITY FCO
Confidential
K2 304
TELNO 1563
RECEIVED
OF 231115Z APRIL 87
INFO PRIORITY PEKING
TOY
24 APR 1987 TOP COPY
INDE
YOUR TELNO 1078: FILM CENSORSHIP~~-
a
PIST 7
Mek
57/4
WAS EXAMINED BY A CENSOR ON
1. ''THE COLDEST WINTER IN PEKING'
14 APRIL 1987 IN THE COMPANY OF FOUR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
ADVISORY GROUP (PAG). (NOTE: THE PAG CONSISTS OF ORDINARY MEMBERS
OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE INVITED ON A ROSTER BASIS TO VIEW FILMS WITH
THE CENSORS. THEIR ROLE IS PURELY ADVISORY AND THE CENSOR IS NOT
OBLIGED TO ACCEPT THEIR ADVICE). ON THIS OCCASION, ONE MEMBER
ADVISED THAT THE FILM SHOULD BE BANNED, ONE THAT IT SHOULD BE SHOWN
SUBJECT TO THE EXCISION OF SCENES OF VIOLENCE AND TWO THAT IT SHOULD
BE APPROVED FOR EXHIBITION.
2. THE POLITICAL ADVISER ALSO VIEWED THE FILM AND ADVISED AGAINST ITS
EXHIBITION ON THE GROUNDS THAT ITS PUBLIC EXHIBITION
WAS LIKELY TO DAMAGE HONG KONG'S GOOD RELATIONS WITH ANOTHER
TERRITORY, NAMELY CHINA. AT MY REQUEST HE ASSESSED THE FILM BOTH
IN THE LIGHT OF CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING TODAY 1.E. AS IF IT WERE BEING SUBMITTED FOR THE FIRST TIME: AND ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE
EVENTS OF 1981. HE JUDGED THAT, EVEN TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE PASSAGE OF TIME SINCE THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, THE FILM WOULD BE SEEN AS ANTI PRC PROPAGANDA, PARTICULARLY SINCE IT DEPICTED THE ACTIVITIES OF A ''DEMOCRATIC'' RESISTANCE MOVEMENT CONTINUING AFTER THE FALL OF THE
GANG OF FOUR. EVEN IF THE FILM HAD NOT BEEN BANNED BEFORE, HE CONSIDERED THAT IT WOULD RISK STIRRING UP LOCAL DISPUTES BETWEEN
KMT AND CCP SUPPORTERS AND WOULD AROUSE OBJECTIONS FROM THE
AUTHORITIES. THE FACT THAT THERE HAD BEEN A PROTEST BEFORE MADE IT
THE MORE LIKELY THAT THE CHINESE WOULD DO SO AGAIN BECAUSE THEY
WOULD SEE THE LATEST APPLICATION AS A TEST OF THE HKG'S ATTITUDE.
IN THE LIGHT OF THIS ADVICE THE CENSOR HAS DECIDED TO BAN THE FILM
3. A VERBAL REPORT WILL BE MADE TO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL ON 28 APRIL
1987 AND THE DISTRIBUTOR WILL BE ADVISED IN WRITING ON THE FOLLOWING
DAY OF THE CENSOR'S DECISION TO BAN THE FILM ON THE SAME GROUNDS ON
WHICH THE PREVIOUS SUBMISSION WAS BANNED. THE ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT
GIVE ANY PUBLICITY TO THE CENSOR'S DECISION. (N.B. THAT DECISION, UNDER THE EXISTING LEGISLATION, IS FOR THE CENSOR ALONE. THE ADMINISTRATION HAS NOT DIRECTED HIM IN ANY WAY ALTHOUGH HE HAS
BEEN INFORMED OF THE POLITICAL ADVISER'S ADVICE.)
4. THE DISTRIBUTOR HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL. AGAINST THE CENSOR'S DECISION TO A BOARD OF REVIEW COMPRISING THREE OFFICIAL MEMBERS AND THREE NON-OFFICIALS UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR TELEVISION AND ENTERTAINMENT LICENSING. THE BOARD OF REVIEWS
DECISION WILL BE FINAL. HOWEVER THAT WOULD NOT PREVENT THE DISTRIBUTOR SUING THE GOVERNMENT ON THE BASIS THAT THE LEGALITY
OF THE REGULATIONS WAS IN DOUBT.
Confidential
и
144
149