*********************************************************
The Government announced today (April 19) for public consultation policy proposals to protect young people from obscene and indecent materials. The proposals are the outcome of a comprehensive review of the Control of Obscene and Indecent Articles Ordinance (COIAO). The COIAO prohibits the publication of obscene articles and restricts the publication of articles containing indecent materials to adults.
For the purpose of the review and in order to gauge public views, the Government had conducted a public opinion survey on the operation of the COIAO, the report on which was published in May 1999.
The results of the survey indicated a general view that there is a need to protect young people from exposure to indecent articles. Most of the respondents therefore objected to the publication of indecent articles in newspapers and publications that can be made available to persons below the age of 18. The survey results also showed that there was general acceptance of the existing system of classifying obscene and indecent articles according to the moral standards generally accepted by the community and of involving members of the public in the classification of articles. While there was support for the classification of articles by the Obscene Articles Tribunal (OAT) which consists of a presiding magistrate and members of the public, the survey results also reflected the need to enhance the representativeness of the composition of the OAT.
While the OAT's standards for classifying obscene articles were generally in line with the community's standards, its classification standards in respect of indecent articles in newspapers, magazines and comic books were generally considered to be more liberal than the moral standards of the community. There was also confusion between the article classification system under the COIAO and the film classification system.
"We are conscious that community standards of morality, decency and propriety change with time, and that the taste and standards differ from one individual to another," said Ms Eva Cheng, Acting Secretary for Information Technology and Broadcasting, today.
"In any community, there are bound to be occasions where clashes between public standards and private taste occur and where differences arise between what the community can stand and what an individual wishes to have access to.
"There should not be undue restrictions on what adults in a free society should be able to see, hear and read. However, children and young people, being impressionable and vulnerable, need particular protection from the harmful effects of obscene and indecent articles. Therefore, in drawing up our proposals, we have aimed to strike a balance between protecting public morals and our young people on the one hand and preserving the free flow of information and safeguarding the freedom of expression on the other," Ms Cheng stressed.
"Journalistic ethics, professional standards and editorial decisions in news reporting are outside the scope of this consultation exercise and are not covered in this consultation paper," Ms Cheng added.
The key proposals in the consultation paper are -
(a) to strengthen the guidance set out in the COIAO for determining whether an article is obscene or indecent. The proposed additional guidance includes whether an article deals with matters such as sex, horror, crime, cruelty or violence in manners that are not accepted by reasonable members of the community; whether an article advertises services which are not acceptable to reasonable members of the community in terms of public decency; and whether an article is considered by reasonable members of the community to be harmful to persons below the age of 18;
(b) to revise the definition of the term "article" in the COIAO to bring gifts and prizes distributed with publications, sound-recordings, video-tapes and discs, etc. under the control of the COIAO;
(c)to introduce a new set of nomenclature for classification of articles under the COIAO which is distinctly different from that of film classification. Under the new arrangement, articles could be classified as "unrestricted", "restricted to 18 and above" and "banned";
(d)to adopt alternative means of identification for newspapers containing indecent materials by, for instance, requiring these newspapers to have a certain identification mark printed on every page and the statutory warning for indecent articles printed on the front page;
(e)to replace the existing classification system by a two-tier classification system comprising an obscene articles classification board and the OAT. The classification board will be an executive body responsible for classifying articles, with members drawn from some broad sectors of the community so as to better channel the input of the community into the classification process. To provide checks and balance, the OAT will be reconstituted but remain as a judicial body to consider appeals against the decisions of the classification board and to deal with the determination of articles referred to it by a court or a magistrate. Adjudicators in OAT hearings will be selected from the list of jurors (currently there are some 270 000 persons on the list of jurors) so as to enhance the representativeness of the OAT;
(f)to increase the maximum penalties under the COIAO to achieve the desired deterrent effect. The proposed maximum fine on publication of obscene articles and possession/import of obscene articles for the purpose of publication is $2 million (with no change to the term of imprisonment for three years) and the maximum penalty for publishing indecent articles or displaying indecent matter is a maximum fine of $800,000 (with no change to the term of imprisonment for one year) on first conviction and a maximum fine of $1.6 million and imprisonment for two years on a second or subsequent conviction;
(g)to establish a serial publication order system under which an order may be issued on a serial publication (which are printed articles published at regular intervals including newspapers) if a specified number of issues of the publication published within a certain period are obscene or are published not in accordance with the statutory requirements for publication of indecent articles. The serial publication order will require issues of the serial publication published within the duration of the order to be clearly identified as such, for example, by having a red line printed diagonally and prominently on the front page or cover and every page of the publication, and to comply with certain requirements governing the publication. Publications subject to a serial publication order cannot be sold to persons under the age of 18;
(h)to empower inspectors of the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority to seize articles so as to prohibit sale of indecent articles to juveniles and check the identity cards of purchasers of indecent articles and vendors; and
(i)to clarify the legal liabilities of Internet service providers as conveyors of information and consider enhancing enforcement capabilities in respect of obscene articles on the Internet by, for example, empowering the enforcement agencies to seek an authorization/order from a magistrate requiring Internet service providers to remove or block access to obscene articles.
"Legislative control and enforcement action by the Government alone cannot prevent young people from buying and reading indecent publications. We need the concerted efforts of publishers, vendors, schools and parents to work together for the wider community interest and in particular for our younger generation," Ms Cheng said.
The consultation paper appeals to parents to be more vigilant in exercising parental guidance. It also contains proposals to encourage schools and other non-governmental organisations to draw up lists of publications recommended to be bought by parents for their children; to step up public education and publicity on filtering tools and other advisory services; and to enlist the assistance of educational, social and youth organisations to promote the proper use of the Internet among students in schools and at home.
"It is extremely important that the public provide us with their views on these proposals. We welcome comments on the proposals and shall consider all submissions very carefully before we decide on the way forward," Ms Cheng said.
Comments on the proposals should be sent to the Information Technology and Broadcasting Bureau by mail (2/F, Murray Building, Garden Road, Hong Kong), by fax (2511 1458) or via e-mail (itbbenq@itbb.gcn.gov.hk) on or before June 19, 2000.
The consultation paper can be downloaded from the homepage of the Information Technology and Broadcasting Bureau (http://www.info.gov.hk/itbb/). Printed copies are now available at the Information Technology and Broadcasting Bureau and will be available at the District Offices from April 28.
Ends/Wednesday, April 19, 2000
NNNN