'Law Of Indecency Being Challenged’

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30738, 30 April 1965, Page 3

'Law Of Indecency Being Challenged’

f.Veic Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, April 29.

Except for “hard-core pornography” there was a fairly wide consensus in the New Zealand community that adults should be legally free to read what they please, said the Attorney-General (Mr Hanan) tonight.

Mr Hanan was addressing a Wairakei conference of the Associated Booksellers of New Zealand on the problems of indecent publications.

He said that with the establishment of natural and outspoken references to sex the field of censorship—even for the young—was diminishing.

“But there is some justification for protecting children and young people from harmful influences“Of course, standards are changing, even in the case of young people. Frankness is much greater, and ignorance less than it was even a generation ago,” he said.

“What would have been regarded as hardly fit for the Victorian pater familias is now commonplace for the hypothetical 14-year-old schoolgirl—and in some ways Is to be applauded,” he said. But there was one point he wished to make. “So much of modern writing deals with aberrations and perversions, that it is not very desirable that these should be presented to immature minds Svhich might not be able to !;rasp their true significance n the scheme of things.” I Commenting on the problems facing the Indecent Publications Tribunal and the Significance of the new act “passed amid great sound and iury” in 1963, Mr Hanan said: “The subject continues to be Dne of lively interest and contention—if only on the basis that anything to do with sex Is always newsworthy.”

The Minister said the whole asis of the law of indecency -once more or less the sublet of common agreement—ras now being questioned and hallenged.

“Acute Problem” “In a sense, the problem of hat to do about indecency

n literature is acute in New Zealand today simply because re are not a close society— Ind are therefore open to Iverseas trends, opinions and tractices.

“Since the last war there las been a remarkable intrease of interest in the ibscenity laws in many parts

>f the world. “There have been attempts here and there to hold the line, but the general trend has been towards more and more freedom, and the relaxation of previous standards.” Mr Hanan said New Zea-

land was in many ways a conservative country where Ordinary citizens were lecustomed to voice their bpinions on all subjects.

•He said the movement for treater freedom and for fewer and fewer restrictions bn what might be published has produced a state of tenlion and a clash between old md new views.

“It can almost be said there ire no longer any commonly iccepted standards in the ield of indecent literature.”

He said the traditional view was that a state had a responsibility to prohibit writings which might deprave or corrupt “Many people today would wholly reject this, and would ask what if anything, justified the intervention of the law. They point out that it is hard to show anyone has been induced by reading a particular book to go out and commit a crime or an act of sexual misconduct” he said. He said perhaps the most “dangerous” books in that sense were those which were not indecent at all In themselves—but which attempted to persuade the mind that certain things were not wrong.

“Other people see in the present situation only a proliferation of unhealthy and unnatural treatment of what should be the mainsprings of life, and clamour for something to be done to stop it—however drastic,” he said. “Thus we are in a period of transition with many striving to uphold old standards and wanting more efficient supervision, and others wanting little intervention or even none at all.

“In a situation like this, the Government is between the lines being fired on by both sides. Whatever it does is sure to be wrong—and if it does nothing it is attacked for inaction,” he said. “About Right” All he could hope was that attacks from both sides would be pf roughly equal force. “If so we can tell ourselves that our policy is about right,” he said. Amplifying the role of the Indecent Publications Tribunal, he said:

“There is, I think, widespread agreement that a distinction can properly be made between works with pretensions to literary or social merit or significance—and those which exploit sex or violence for its own sake.

“It can be argued with some force that writings belonging to this latter class have no more claim to be tolerated than other forms of commercialisation of sex,” he said. Mr Hanan said two notions —the distinction between the needs of adults and children, and the distinction between works with some merit and writings which were no more than worthless rubbish—were at the root of the Indecent Publications Act.

“It can probably now be said that under the approach of the Indecent Publications Tribunal, works with some merit which would have been excluded under the previous law are available to those who want them.

"On the other hand, the tribunal has shown it is prepared to exclude meretricious rubbish altogether and its division in the case of three flamboyant American paperbacks has illuminated the position,” said Mr Hanan. Side Of Freedom "On every occasion I think the wise course is to err, if at all, on the side of freedom. If the scales are evenly balanced the decision—at whatever level it is taken—should be against restraint. “This is in keeping with the principles of free society. “At present we are going through a period of uncertainty,” he said. “The value of the Indecent Publications Act will depend on how successful the tribunal is in making it clear where the line is to be drawn, between what is permitted and what is not.” Mr Hanan said the establishment of the .tribunal was an experiment being watched by other interested countries. “Will the tribunal be successful in its difficult task—or will we experience, in the future a withering away of censorship similar to that which has taken place in the United States and in Britain?” he asked. U.S. Attitude "An article in an international magazine claims that ‘just about anything is printable in the United States today’. “It goes on to contend that extravagances produced by that situation tend to throw discredit upon the liberties gained and to reach absurd limits. “The present flood of writings which are open to question from the standpoint of morals and taste may well produce a revulsion on the part of readers, which will prove far more effective than any attempt could be to stem it by law,” he said.