Censorship Preferred?

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32117, 13 October 1969, Page 13

Censorship Preferred?

(N.Z.P.A.-Reuter— ■Copyright) ATHENS, Oct. 12. A week after Greece’s Army - backed Government announced the restoration of press freedom, newspaper editors are wondering whether rigid censorship might not be preferable to the constant threat of prosecution. Many editors are convinced that when the Prime Minister (Colohd George Papadopoulos) announced an easing of the censorship laws, he was more concerned with his Government’s image abroad that with the feelings of newspaper proprietors. One reason for this is that the regulations governing publication are now vague enough to leave editors and owners constanly open to prosecution by courts-martial. Colonel Papadopoulos, who

emerged from the 1967 Army revolution as the strong-man of the present regime, this month announced a partial restoration of civil liberties, severely curtailed when the colonels staged their coup and seized power. He told the Greek people that public order in Greece had been substantially improved,’ and it was possible for his Government to ease regulations regarding censorship, arbitrary arrest and trial by military tribunals. But he also said ttat all offences related to public order and national security would continue to be - dealt with by courts-martial, in accordance with tte provisions tiuwr entfausiasn was shortThe Press Ministry lost ®o time in issuing a two-pegs Ifrt of banned topics, accompanied by a threat of prosecution

before courts-martial if these regulations were violated. The banned topics included all comments or news directed against public order, security and national integrity, and news items which might incite demonstrations, mass meetings or strikes. Since censorship was officially lifted, not one Athenian newspaper has dared to criticise any of the Government's activities, or put forward constructive ideas as Colonel Papadopoulos had invited them to do. - Most continue as they did under censorship, and some have even come out in praise of the liberalisation measures which, in effect, restrict their scope. In these circumstances many publishers now privately say they would prefer the shield of censorship, since its abolition has given them no real freedom but has rather burdened them with too many responsibilities and risks of prosecution.