The Press FRIDAY, JULY 4, 1969. Scientology

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32031, 4 July 1969, Page 10

The Press FRIDAY, JULY 4, 1969. Scientology

The recommendations of the commission of inquiry into the Hubbard Scientology Organisation in New Zealand stop well short of the drastic measures taken in Victoria four years ago, when the cult was banned from that state. Since 1965, however, the founder of the movement, Mr L. Ron Hubbard, has issued a “ code of reform ”, abolishing some of the more objectionable practices of the cult. The date of this reform—November 29, 1968—suggests that Scientology’s leaders were concerned lest the New Zealand inquiry might lead to the banning of the movement here. The subsequent lette/ from Mr Hubbard to the commission on the practice of “ disconnection ” is further evidence of this concern.

The commission, “ relying on Lady Hort’s “ candour and co-operation and upon the evidence “ of the changed outlook on the part of Scientology ”, has not recommended any legislation to curb the cult in New Zealand, but has laid down four “ rules “ of practice ” which, it feels, the movement should regard as “ indispensable ”. These rules, if followed, should remove most reasonable objections to the continued existence of the movement in New Zealand. They would ensure that critics of the movement were not “ disconnected ”, declared “ suppressive persons ” or “ enemies of Scientology ”, deluged with Scientology literature through the mail, or otherwise persecuted. The prohibition of “auditing” or “processing”, or the training of anyone under 21 without the consent of the parents —the principal cause of the establishment of the commission—is also recommended by the commission.

The Government should have no hesitation in accepting these recommendations and in informing

the Scientology movement that any breach of these rules may result in the banishment of the movement The movement would be wise to regard these rules as the minimum conditions likely to be tolerated by the public; and their acceptance should not imply the granting of a right to practise Scientology in this country. The somewhat restrictive terms of reference for the commission’s inquiry prevented it from hearing evidence and pronouncing on the medical and psychological implications of Scientology; but the practice of medicine, psychology, and psychiatry is governed by legislation which could — and should—be enforced on Scientologists as on any other unqualified persons attempting to practise in these fields. The rules drawn up by the commission, and the existing legislation, need not be construed by Scientologists as carte blanche; both the rules and the legislation are likely to be invoked, and are subject to amendment.