1988-12-23 15:46 AGC
852 5 865 2720 P.03
a forum for lawyers from private practice, the University and from Government to discuss human rights generally. The meetings drew no conclu- sions nor did they aim to draw conclusions. Various documents were prepared and discussed but no draft Bill was prepared. At the last meeting those attending agreed that as the topics had been fully discussed there was no point in holding further meetings.
The Public Order (Amendment) Order 1987 Section 27
The review I referred to at the meeting of the Human Rights Committee in November has been concluded. A Bill to repeal section 27 was introduced into the Legislative Council on 14 December.
The Film Censorship Ordinance 1988
"Article 19" asserts that "the Hong Kong Government has been censoring films for 34 years without legal authority". In fact, this has not been established. While it is true that opinions have been expressed that this is the case, opinions to the contrary have also been expressed. An action brought by one film distributor to establish whether this is the case has not been continued.
The general arguments supporting the view that section 10(2)(c) of the Ordinance is not compatible with Article 19 of the ICCPR are well known to FCO. Clarification of the procedure to be followed is set out in paragraphs 35-39 of the Guidelines for Censors, which have been The published in the Gazette (copy attached). analysis by "Article 19" fails to point out that there is an appeal procedure through the Film Censorship Board of Review, the Chairman and majority of members of which are independent of the Administration. The Board is also required to take Article 19 of the ICCPR into account.
Merry Christmas to all and a prosperous and peaceful New Year.
Regards,
11
Encl.
c.c.
Deputy Chief Secretary
E H Martin)
Deputy Solicitor General
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.