TNAG-1689-FCO40-2339-Hong-Kong-legislation-regarding-the-control-of-publications--1987 — Page 180

KD.30/1

RECEIVE

3 CAPR 1987

REGISTRY

Action Take!!

mek

115

OCMIAN 1235

CONFIDENTIAL

OO HOKON

FM FCOLN TO HOKON

291300Z APR

GRS 493

CONFIDENTIAL

FM FCO

TO IMMEDIATE HONG KONG

TELNO 1195

OF 291300Z APRIL 87

INFO PRIORITY PEKING

CONFIDENTIAL

51235

YOUR TELNOS 1620 AND 1631: FILM CENSORSHIP

1.

WE SHARE YOUR VIEW IN FIRST SENTENCE OF PARA 1, AND PARA

2, OF SECOND TUR. WE HAVE DISCUSSED TURS BRIEFLY WITH FIFOOT BEFORE HIS DEPARTURE FOR HONG KONG TOMORROW, AND THE FOLLOWING

ARE OUR PRELIMINARY REACTIONS..

2.

THE FIRST POINT TO BEAR IN MIND IS OF COURSE THAT ARTICLE

19 IS NOT (NOT) DIRECTLY JUSTICIABLE IN THE COURTS OF HONG KONG.

IN THE FACE OF A CLEARLY WORDED AND UNAMBIGUOUS ORDINANCE, THE

COURTS SHOULD HAVE NO GROUNDS FOR SEEKING CLARIFICATION OF YOUR

LEGISLATION IN THE LIGHT OF ARTICLE 19. OUR OBJECTIVE MUST

THEREFORE BE TO MAKE THE BEST CASE WE CAN FOR CENSORSHIP WITHIN

THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 19 FOR USE IN AND OUT OF LEG CO IN DEFENCE OF A DECISION TO LEGISLATE, AND TO FRAME THE DRAFT BILL IN

SUFFICIENTLY PRECISE TERMS.

3.

ON YOUR SPECIFIC QUERIES IN PARA 3 OF SECOND TUR OUR

INITIAL VIEWS ARE:

(A)

(B)

YES

EACH FILM WOULD OF COURSE NEED TO BE JUDGED ON ITS OWN MERITS, BUT IF AN ACCUMULATION OF SIMILAR FILMS INCREASED THE RISK OF DISORDER, THEN THIS FACT MAY BE TAKEN INTO

ACCOUNT.

1

CONFIDENTIAL

<

1

Page 180Page 181