མ་་་
73C
о
From..
5000733
CONFIDENTIAL
Attorney General's Chambers
(212)...
AGC 5/20/62c
95265
Ref.
Tel. No.
Date
14th March, 1972.
MEMO
To
Hon. S..A.
Your Ref (26) in
dated 9.3.72
371
SHA. 1/16/120c V
Film: "The Priest's Wife"
In June of last year the owner of this film had a statutory right of appeal to the Board which then consisted of yourself, Director of Education, the Commissioner of Police, and such other persons as H.E. might have nominated; and any three members constituted a quorum.
2.
The owner sought to exercise that right of appeal, but it was not afforded 20 him because a quorum of the Board did not consider the film.
3.
The owner has now indicated that he wishes to pursue this matter further and is attacking the validity of the Censorship Regulations. You asked for our advice in this situation.
4.
Any argument with the owner of the film about whether or not the film has been properly and legally banned involves you in the pretence that the owner was afforded the right which the law gave him. We cannot advise you to take any such course. You can imagine as well as I can the sort of criticism which would be voiced if we vere taken to court and this all came out.
5.
One way of dealing with the matter would be for the Board to write to the owner stating that its policy is to ban any film which it considers would give serious offence to any large religious group in the Colony, and the Board considers itself bound by the regulations in the matter and is of the opinion that these regulations enable it to ban a film on these grounds. The letter could then go on to point cut that it has been discovered that when the film was viewed by the Board for the purposes of the appeal a full quorum was not present; and if having regard to what has been said about the Board's policy the owner wishes to re-submit the film, it will be considered
by a full quorum of the Board.
CONFIDENTIAL
14.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.