TNAG-1689-FCO40-2339-Hong-Kong-legislation-regarding-the-control-of-publications--1987 — Page 259

CONFIDENTIAL

FM HONG KONG

TO PRIORITY FCO

Confidential

K2 304

TELNO 1563

RECEIVED

OF 231115Z APRIL 87

INFO PRIORITY PEKING

TOY

24 APR 1987 TOP COPY

INDE

YOUR TELNO 1078: FILM CENSORSHIP~~-

a

PIST 7

Mek

57/4

WAS EXAMINED BY A CENSOR ON

1. ''THE COLDEST WINTER IN PEKING'

14 APRIL 1987 IN THE COMPANY OF FOUR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

ADVISORY GROUP (PAG). (NOTE: THE PAG CONSISTS OF ORDINARY MEMBERS

OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE INVITED ON A ROSTER BASIS TO VIEW FILMS WITH

THE CENSORS. THEIR ROLE IS PURELY ADVISORY AND THE CENSOR IS NOT

OBLIGED TO ACCEPT THEIR ADVICE). ON THIS OCCASION, ONE MEMBER

ADVISED THAT THE FILM SHOULD BE BANNED, ONE THAT IT SHOULD BE SHOWN

SUBJECT TO THE EXCISION OF SCENES OF VIOLENCE AND TWO THAT IT SHOULD

BE APPROVED FOR EXHIBITION.

2. THE POLITICAL ADVISER ALSO VIEWED THE FILM AND ADVISED AGAINST ITS

EXHIBITION ON THE GROUNDS THAT ITS PUBLIC EXHIBITION

WAS LIKELY TO DAMAGE HONG KONG'S GOOD RELATIONS WITH ANOTHER

TERRITORY, NAMELY CHINA. AT MY REQUEST HE ASSESSED THE FILM BOTH

IN THE LIGHT OF CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING TODAY 1.E. AS IF IT WERE BEING SUBMITTED FOR THE FIRST TIME: AND ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE

EVENTS OF 1981. HE JUDGED THAT, EVEN TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE PASSAGE OF TIME SINCE THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, THE FILM WOULD BE SEEN AS ANTI PRC PROPAGANDA, PARTICULARLY SINCE IT DEPICTED THE ACTIVITIES OF A ''DEMOCRATIC'' RESISTANCE MOVEMENT CONTINUING AFTER THE FALL OF THE

GANG OF FOUR. EVEN IF THE FILM HAD NOT BEEN BANNED BEFORE, HE CONSIDERED THAT IT WOULD RISK STIRRING UP LOCAL DISPUTES BETWEEN

KMT AND CCP SUPPORTERS AND WOULD AROUSE OBJECTIONS FROM THE

AUTHORITIES. THE FACT THAT THERE HAD BEEN A PROTEST BEFORE MADE IT

THE MORE LIKELY THAT THE CHINESE WOULD DO SO AGAIN BECAUSE THEY

WOULD SEE THE LATEST APPLICATION AS A TEST OF THE HKG'S ATTITUDE.

IN THE LIGHT OF THIS ADVICE THE CENSOR HAS DECIDED TO BAN THE FILM

3. A VERBAL REPORT WILL BE MADE TO EXECUTIVE COUNCIL ON 28 APRIL

1987 AND THE DISTRIBUTOR WILL BE ADVISED IN WRITING ON THE FOLLOWING

DAY OF THE CENSOR'S DECISION TO BAN THE FILM ON THE SAME GROUNDS ON

WHICH THE PREVIOUS SUBMISSION WAS BANNED. THE ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT

GIVE ANY PUBLICITY TO THE CENSOR'S DECISION. (N.B. THAT DECISION, UNDER THE EXISTING LEGISLATION, IS FOR THE CENSOR ALONE. THE ADMINISTRATION HAS NOT DIRECTED HIM IN ANY WAY ALTHOUGH HE HAS

BEEN INFORMED OF THE POLITICAL ADVISER'S ADVICE.)

4. THE DISTRIBUTOR HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL. AGAINST THE CENSOR'S DECISION TO A BOARD OF REVIEW COMPRISING THREE OFFICIAL MEMBERS AND THREE NON-OFFICIALS UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR TELEVISION AND ENTERTAINMENT LICENSING. THE BOARD OF REVIEWS

DECISION WILL BE FINAL. HOWEVER THAT WOULD NOT PREVENT THE DISTRIBUTOR SUING THE GOVERNMENT ON THE BASIS THAT THE LEGALITY

OF THE REGULATIONS WAS IN DOUBT.

Confidential

и

144

149