TNAG-1553-FCO40-2117-Hong-Kong-Control-of-Publications-Consolidation-Ordinance-19-1986 — Page 2

completed its

deliberations

early September 1985, and a summary of its report is paragraph 11. A copy of the full report is at Annex A.

6

in

in

While the working group was considering the tribunal proposal, the proliferation of cheap, locally produced pornographic magazines

magazines provoked a widespread concern from various sectors of the community. The Government was urged to adopt more effective measures to keep these magazines away from the public eye, and particularly out of sight of juveniles. In April this year, there were well over eighteen such magazines

magazines requiring close monitoring, and the most popular ones were selling 100,000 to 200,000 copies per issue. (Note 1) With the support of the Police, territory-wide seizure actions were mounted against the vendors, in addition to prosecution action taken against those responsible for editing, publishing, printing and distributing publications deemed objectionable under the ordinance. The courts responded with slightly heavier sentences than those previously handed down. (Note 2) The combined effect of these measures has been to keep the problem under control for several months.

7

However, between May and July, the suspicion emerged in some quarters that the tribunal proposal was part of some hidden Government agenda. Fears of political censorship, and of interference by the Administration with judicial independence, were conjured up and some critics were worried about the absence of any avenue of appeal against the tribunal's ruling. There was also concern that the the tribunal might be extended to cover other forms of 'objectionable' publications.

8

The Administration,

powers of

therefore, decided not to publish the tribunal proposal for public comment until the full report was finalized. The public, including both opponents and supporters of the proposal, has thus been kept waiting for the findings of the working group.

Note (1) At retail price of $5 per

of $5 per copy, it was estimated that the publisher and the vendor would each make a profit of $1.30 on every copy sold.

Note (2)

The fines imposed in late 1984 for such cases ranged from $500 to $2,500, whereas those in mid-1985 were between $1,000 to $24,000, including in

in one case a term of imprisonment.