WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 1987
25
'WE MUST LEARN HOW TO COMPROMISE'
*****
IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY BETTER ALTERNATIVE AT THIS STAGE, THE HON TAI CHIN-WAH SAID HE WAS SATISFIED WITH THE PRESENT VERSION OF THE PUBLIC ORDER (AMENDMENT) BILL 1986.
SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL DURING THE RESUMED DEBATE IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY (WEDNESDAY), MR TAI SAID HE WAS SYMPATHETIC TO THE REQUEST FOR A SHORT EXTENSION OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE BILL.
APART FROM POLITICAL REASONS, HE SAID HE COULD NOT SEE ANY STRONG REASON WHY THE BILL COULD NOT BE DEFERRED FOR A SHORT PER 10D OF TIME.
+HONG KONG HAS LATELY BEEN SUBJECTED TO MUCH POLITICAL CONFRONTATION AND IT WOULD BE A MISCONCEPTION TO THINK THAT BY DEFERRING THE BILL IT COULD BE REGARDED AS DETRIMENTAL TO GOVERNMENT'S EFFECTIVENESS AND CREDIBILITY.
+FOR THE LONGER TERM BENEFIT AND VIABILITY OF HONG KONG, WE MUST LEARN HOW TO COMPROMISE, HE SAID.
SECTION 27(3) STIPULATED THE NECESSITY FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S CONSENT TO INITIATE PROSECUTION AND HE WAS ACCOUNTABLE TO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL FOR WHATEVER ACTION OR INACTION ON HIS PART REGARDING A PARTICULAR CASE.
+TOO OFTEN WE TALK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE EXECUTIVE TO THE LEGISLATURE, AND THE LEGISLATORS'S ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PUBLIC.
+SHOULD NOT THE PUBLISHER IN TURN BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR WHAT HE PUBLISHES IF THE STATEMENTS HE MAKES ARE FALSE AND RESULT IN PUBLIC DISORDER?+ MR TAI ASKED.
HE SAID UNTIL AND UNLESS THE BILL WAS PUT INTO PRACTICE AND CASE LAW ESTABLISHED REGARDING ITS PRACTICAL ENFORCEMENT, OR THAT ALTERNATIVE WORDING WAS FOUND TO REMOVE THE DIFFICULTIES OF THE BILL, OR THAT THERE WAS CLEAR EVIDENCE WHICH INDICATED THAT THE BILL HAD INDEED IMPOSED SUPPRESSION ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH, HE WOULD SUPPORT THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL TODAY.
MR TAI ADMITTED THAT THE BILL HAD A NUMBER OF FLAWS. FIRSTLY, IT FAILED TO CLARIFY THE MEANING BEHIND THE WORDINGS SUCH AS +LIKELY TO CAUSE PUBLIC ALARM AND PUBLIC DISORDER+, THE PRECISE LEGAL IMPLICATION OF WHICH WAS UNCLEAR.
/SECONDLY, IT