"public order" in Article 19 paragraph 3b. I agree with paragraph 5 of Mr. Barendt's Opinion that the French concept of "ordre
public" is wider than the protection of public order in the
narrow physical sense. I doubt whether the concept is wide enough
to cover good relations between different territories or
countries. However, I agree that the Government would be able to
argue, with some persuasive force, that the situation of Hong Kong and its unique relationship with the People's Republic of
China, makes the concept of "ordre public" somewhat broader in
Hong Kong than in other territories or countries. On the other hand, the exercise of the powers of censorship on the massively wide basis described in the previous paragraph would, in my opinion, fall outside even the most generous interpretation of the ordre public of Hong Kong. The same applies to the reference,
in Article 19 paragraph 3b, to "the protection of national
security". I therefore conclude that the legislation authorises
restraints upon the right to free expression which would not
pursue any legitimate aim within the scope
of Article 19
paragraph 3, and which would, if imposed by the censor, therefore
be in breach of Article 19 read as a whole.
Principles governing the Necessity Test
15. The final question under Article 19 paragraph 3 is whether restrictions imposed by the censor are "necessary" in terms of
Article 19 paragraph 3, for the protection of an aim or goal stated in that provision. It is again difficult to answer this
question in the abstract, since So much depends upon the
particular manner in which the powers of censorship are
exercised, and all the surrounding circumstances. The European Court has enunciated a number of important general principles, in the context of the right to freedom of expression and interferences with that right by public authorities, which are relevant to the interpretation of the
the test of necessity in
Article 19 paragraph 3. I will summarise them as follows:
(1) Subject to the exception clause, the right to free
expression is applicable "not only to information or ideas
that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or
12
Page 165Page 166