1
2
сер
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
cap 11
12
13
14
15
Cap 16
17
18
cap 19
20
21
22
23
24
2.5
26
ने
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 7 ☹m in
28
I submit that the first point is a
areas set out in my proviso.
thoroughly bad one because we believe in the rule of law and if a power is wrongly exercised by the administration, then it is in the public interest that such abuse of power be put right by judicial review. As to the second point, a simple example will illustrate that it, too, is a thoroughly bad one. Suppose I need $3 from a friend in order to buy an MTR ticket and I say to him, may I have your wallet so that I can have $3 to buy myself a ticket ?
But I must say that once I have your wallet, I will take more than
$3.
Will my friend in these circumstances let me have his wallet ? Sir, I am shocked by the bold stance taken by the administration. This Council is being asked to allow the power given to the censor to continue, on the basis that it can be justified under Article 19 of the covenant in only three areas, and yet this Council is told
that once the power is left intact, it will be applied to other areas not mentioned in Article 19. Is the administration not insulting the intelligence of members of this Council ?
My third reason for moving an amendment to these interim measures is due to the administration's failure to show that the restriction is necessary, principally because of the unlawful exercise by the censor of a power which was never given to him for over thisfy years. During this period many films have been banned on political grounds, with the result that the public cannot
judge for themselves what effect these films would have on our
community.
If my motion is carried, at least until the Film Censorship 27 Bill 1987 is presented to this Council in a few months' time there
will be no political censorship of films in Hong Kong. The public can then judge for themselves whether we need a similar provision in the Bill, namely, to ban: a film which is "seriously prejudicial
to good relations to territories outside Hong Kong."
29
30
31
32
33
34
But if my motion is defeated today, we will never know
whether there is a real necessity for it.
Sir, I do not see any danger in suspending such a power 35 for such a time because it is inconceivable that a film which
offends this regulation which is shown in a Causeway Bay or a
36
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.