1987-07-09 09:32 COMMS. OFFICE (GOV'T HSE)
852 5 845 0995 P.08
-7-
properly deem it necessary to restrict an offensive publication in
particular ways short of a total ban. So the fact that Hong Kong
provides this form of censorship for the exhibition of films only
would not undermine the case that this restriction was in
conformity with Article 19.
That is Hong Kong's appreciation of
the special needs and circumstances of this territory.
15.
I do not propose to take up time in pointing to other
communities which have similar powers of censorship to prevent
damage to relations with other States, or offence to their
peoples. Examples are given in our comments on Dr. Barendt's
opinion. Sometimes these have been in statutory form, sometimes
in a voluntary code. Some are now in force and some have been
repealed. It is sufficient to remark that Hong Kong is not
unique in seeking to use powers of censorship to prevent damage to
its relations with other territories, and so far as our researches
go, no one previously has sought to make the case that Article 19
would be infringed by censorship for such a purpose.
16.
To be fair to Dr. Barendt, I do not think he takes
up so dogmatic a stand as Mr. Martin Lee has adopted in this
debate. He has recognised that Hong Kong's position at this
moment is one that has to be treated with some sensitivity.
He
said in a broadcast interview on the 25th June, 1987 that it is
possible that the Court of Human Rights would take a sympathetic
+
/8
է