Law Against Scientology Not Recommended

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32031, 4 July 1969, Page 18

Law Against Scientology Not Recommended

Although it found against Scientology on all three heads in its term of reference, the Commission of Inquiry into the Hubbard Scientology organisation in New Zealand, does not make any recommendation on the necessity or expediency of legislation.

The report of the commission, which consisted of Sir Guy Powles, the Ombudsman, as chairman, and Mr E. V. Dumbleton, retired editor of the “Auckland Star,” was tabled in Parliament yesterday.

The commission says that for the future Scientology should regard as indispensable the following rules: 1. No reintroduction of the

practice of disconnection. 2. No issue of suppressive person or declaration of enemy orders by any member to any other member of a family.

3. No auditing, processing or training of anyone under the age of 21 without the specific written consent of both parents, the consent to include approval of the fees, which must be specified, to be charged for the course or courses.

4 A reduction to reasonable dimensions of “promotion” literature sent through the post to individuals and prompt dis-

continuance of it when this is requested.

“If Scientology in New Zealand has regard to these rules of practice no further occasion for Government or public alarm should arise in respect of those of its manifestations with which this inquiry was concerned,” the report said. The commission was charged to inquire into the working of existing law and the necessity or expediency of any legislation on the activities, methods and practices of the Scientology Organisation so far as they might: (a) Cause or contribute to estrangements in family relationships; (b) Affect the custody or control of children and

persons under the age of 21;

(c) Result in persons who ■ have severed their connection with Scientology or any other persons being subjected to improper or unreasonable pressures. Family Relations

It was clear that at some stage of operations, Scientology actively contemplated interfering with family relations in such a way as to induce trainee Scientologists to disconnect from close relatives considered by Scientology to be acting in the role of “suppressive persons,” the commission said.

The practice of disconnection had been cancelled on November 15, and the com-

mission had received a letter from Mr L. Ron Hubbard saying there was no intention of reintroducing the policy. The commission said it did not think legislation should be amended because it disliked adding to the body of statute law restricting personal activities for social reasons and because it had been markedly influenced by what it believed to be a distinct change not only in the activities, methods and practices of Scientology but also in the outlook of the organisation. “If at any time it were to appear that this change had been reversed or some of the old and objectionable practices had been revived, then the Government should, if an important social evil were found to be occurring, take note and consider what steps might be necessary,” it said. Control of Minors Under the heading on the control of persons under 21, the commission said it had been influenced again by what had been said about the change in the practices and by the admission that mistakes had been made.

r It added that the age must ■ refer to the particular age i adopted by the Legislature as being the age of majority. I On the third subject, it I said persons had been sub- ■ jected to improper or unrea- ' sonable pressures. The ques- • tion was whether official assurance of the abandonment of the practice of disconnection and the philisophy associated with it would lead to a substantial improvement. If this was not so, the Government might have to consider whether, for example, it might be expedient to make it an offence to send through the post letters of the deliberately offensive and insulting nature of some of the “disconnecting” letters seen by the commission. The general protection offered by the laws of defamation and blackmail was, the commission felt, adequate to deal with most situations; but if some of the former practices were reverted to it might be necessary to consider legislation requiring a ' more substantial legal entity ; than was now in evidence in the case of Scientology.