XN000022-1995-04-28 — Page 6

- 4 -

The spokesman said the Bill seeks to repeal Section 6 of the Defamation Ordinance which provides that any person who maliciously publishes any defamatory libel shall be liable to imprisonment for one year. The offence does not require proof of an intention to defame nor is truth in itself a defence.

The Administration believed that the criminal law should not be used to protect reputation except from the most serious and flagrant attacks, the spokesman said.

He said: "The Bill also proposes to repeal Section 3(1)(a) of the Judicial Proceedings (Regulation of Reports) Ordinance which makes it an offence to print or publish, in relation to any judicial proceedings, 'any indecent matter or any medical, surgical or physiological details being matter or details which are of a revolting or offensive nature or the publication of which would be calculated to injure public morals"."

The Administration considered that it was unreasonable to expect the press to judge whether the publication of certain matter would be "calculated" to injure public morals, he said.

He noted that the Bill also proposes amendments to the Complex Commercial Crimes Ordinance so that publication of reports of a preparatory hearing of serious and complex commercial crime cases will be allowed after the case has been concluded.

The spokesman said another important aspect of the Bill was to repeal or amend certain provisions which were inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Ordinance (BORO). They include an offence of possessing an offensive weapon and the court's power to hold criminal proceedings in closed court.

The spokesman said: "Under Section 17 of the Summary Offences Ordinance, it is an offence for a person to be in possession of certain things, including an offensive weapon, 'with intent to use the same for any unlawful purpose, or being unable to give satisfactory account of his possession thereof.

"In 1994, the Court of Appeal decided that the words 'or being unable to give satisfactory account of his possession thereof were inconsistent with the presumption of innocence in article 11 of the BORO, and had subsequently been repealed," he said.

Another proposed amendment relating to BORO is to limit a court's power to hold criminal proceedings in closed court and provide a right to appeal against any closure order under the Criminal Procedure Ordinance.