TNAG-1553-FCO40-2117-Hong-Kong-Control-of-Publications-Consolidation-Ordinance-19-1986 — Page 83

CASE OF SECTION 6(1), THE ATTORNEY GENERAL) ON THE OTHER. HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT THE PUBLISHERS SHOULD BE GIVEN A

DEFENCE IN S.6(2) TO THE EFFECT THAT IT SHALL BE A DEFENCE THAT

HE REASONABLY BELIEVES THE NEWS TO BE TRUE.

SECTION 4(1)

THE WORDS OR ANY OTHER OFFENCE OF A NATURE

PREJUDICIAL TO THE SECURITY OF THE COLONY OR TO THE MAINTENANCE

WITHIN THE COLONY OF PUBLIC ORDER, SAFETY, HEALTH OR MORAL''

SHOULD BE DELETED. THE WORDS SAFETY, HEALTH OR MORAL ARE

OBVIOUSLY TOO WIDE IN ITS MEANING TO BE ACCEPTABLE TO ANY

LAWYER OR LEGISLATOR.

IF S.3(A) HAS BEEN AMENDED TO PROVIDE ONLY FOR

''ARRESTABLE OFFENCES'', REFERENCES TO THE OTHER OFFENCES IN S.4(1) (EXCEPT S.3 AND S.6) MAY BE DELETED.

SECTION 4(2), 4(3), 4(6)

C

CAN BE RETAINED BUT NEEDS REDRAFTING.

SECTION 4(4), 4(5)

SHOULD FALL IN LINE WITH SIMILAR PROVISIONS OF THE

OBJECTIONABLE PUBLICATIONS ORDINANCE.

SECTION 5(1)

POWER TO PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF PUBLICATIONS SHOULD BE AMENDED

IN LINE WITH S.3 AND S.4.

SECTION 5(2), 5(3)

RETAINED BUT TO BE REDRAFTED.

SECTION 6

ALREADY DISCUSSED.

SECTION 7(1)

THE PURPOSE OF S.7 IS UNCLEAR. A DOLLARS 10,000 DEPOSIT IS DEFINITELY INSUFFICIENT TO DETER POOR QUALITY PUBLICATION OR TO REPAY AN AVERAGE AWARD OF DAMAGES. S.15 ALREADY CAUGHT THE PROPRIETORS, PRINTER, PUBLISHER AND EDITOR PERSONALLY AND THEY CAN PAY/OR BE FORCED TO PAY THE FINES. THERE SEEMS TO BE NO NEED

FOR THIS SECTION.

SECTION 7(2), (3), (4), (6), (8)

CAN BE DELETED.

ISECTION 7.

3