The Bills, amended by agreement between the Administration and a majority of members of the LegCo ad hoc Group which considered them, were passed by the Legislative Council on 11 March 1987. A copy of Section 27 as finally enacted is at Annex B. However, although initial reaction to the proposals by the media had been favourable, by the time the Bills were debated in LegCo they had become the subject of considerable controversy and were strongly opposed by the local media and a minority of LegCo members. News of the legislation which had been (quite misleadingly) dubbed a "press gag" law
law - also spread overseas and Hong Kong's image suffered as a result. Particular reference was made both locally and overseas to the point that Section 27 may be in breach of Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Review
6
In January 1988, in response to a letter from the then senior Legislative Council Member,
Council Member, the Chief Secretary promised Section 27 would be reviewed at the end of the year.
7
An internal review of Section 27 has been conducted and a report prepared. There is no evidence the Section has affected the operation of the local media. It has continued to report freely, to be forthright and to speculate. Many of the practical arguments which led to the provision being retained still apply: Hong Kong remains a densely populated city where news travels fast; newspapers continue to feed off each other; the public may still be vulnerable to bouts of nervousness from time to time. The legal arguments also remain essentially the same.
8
-
However, it is considered that some things have changed over the two years since the legislation was first gazetted. Led by the media, the general public formed the view invalid though it was that the Government was acting to restrict freedom of the press. This was particularly unfortunate at a time when the public was SO concerned over future civil and political rights. The Government's arguments were deprived of a fair hearing. As a result, there was some loss of
loss of credibility which carried over into consideration of other subject areas. Relations with the media were strained for a long period. Hong Kong's reputation overseas also suffered damage, to the extent that we were bracketed with Singapore albeit unfairly place where the Government sought to control the press. The point was made
made repeatedly that the impact was the greater because of Hong Kong's hitherto excellent reputation as the bastion of a free press in this
in this part of the world. The matter was raised in November 1988 when the United Nations Human Rights Committee considered the UK's report on Hong
Kong.
-
as a
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.