返回列表 回覆 發帖

發表淫審制度改革立場書

i'd like2suggest : ::::: 發表 our own 淫審制度改革立場書
i'd like2suggest : ::::: 發表 our own version o' 淫審制度改革立場書

should 民間團體「色放」b so able ,
then ..... ,
ynot[[why-not]] exChristian.hk ??

100.000 suggestion ,
100.000 food4thought ,

purpose : ::::::::::
let the exChristian.hk b[[=be]] introduced////reported via newspaper e.t.c. to the general public
who , generally do not go internet

note !!!!
i do acknowledged the exChristian.hk currently being under-manned ,
i do acknowledged any exChristian-in-standing-out may b ,,,,,taken-care'''' by Christians
i do acknowledged + accept + embrace 100.000% this proposal should////must b rejected

http://exchristian.hk/forum/view ... 1387&extra=page%3D1
http://news.sina.com.hk/cgi-bin/nw/show.cgi/2/1/1/614249/1.html
【東方日報專訊】
民間團體對淫審處的做法大為不滿,要求政府檢討本港的淫審制度。民間團體「色放」(Sexpress)日前發表淫審制度改革立場書,狠批現時淫審制度缺乏透明度,負責評級的審裁員是「小圈子」,
由影視處篩選,但篩選準則不明。

「色放」又指摘目前淫審制度於初審時以閉門形式進行,
有關出版人和作者難以抗辯,牴觸了人權法。

「色放」又擔心,過去一年接二連三發生多宗創作被刑事檢控的風波,令人憂慮若因言論和表達入罪的機制一旦展開,香港整個自由開放的文化會被摧毀。他們要求政府以業界自律取代由上而下的行政指引,全面檢討淫審制度。

[ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-1-21 17:09 編輯 ]

回復 1# 的帖子

要花些時間研究現時的淫審制度及其不足之處。

看來你似乎有些眉目?你有idea,不妨貼出,讓我們參詳後,真可submit呢。
支持鼓勵每位離教者
原帖由 抽刀斷水 於 2008-1-21 16:58 發表
要花些時間研究現時的淫審制度及其不足之處。

看來你似乎有些眉目?你有idea,不妨貼出,讓我們參詳後,真可submit呢。


ThANKs

some of our own unique points in our [[would-b]] 淫審制度改革立場書 : ::::::::::
----------------------------------------------------------------
.1.
ask those 處長 or vice 處長 or any key-figures to disclose their own religious inclination//belief
----------------------------------------------------------------
.2.
ask each-n-every 審裁員 to unveil their own religious inclination//belief ,
@least ,
@least , a summary////////stats/////////breakDown of their own religious inclination//belief ,
----------------------------------------------------------------
.3.
that's really very
criticcal , due2 the fact of that : : they'r
critic of other people ,
e.g.
should those 審裁員 or 處長 b[[=be]] Christians ,
then ,
when-ever .... u were2submit to them something
anti-Christians
anti-Christs ,
so , u bet it !! what would they think ?????????
h:



----------------------------------------------------------------
.4.
its[[it's]] the era of disclosure ,
e.g. : ::::::::::
each-n-every key officer in hkg[[hkgovernment]] , such as : ::::: ceo tsang ,
must first make a very serious declaration of his own investments interrest
b4
his own in-auguration in his any new office ,
now ,
may b .........
its[[it's]] time4them2make declaration o' their own religious interrest , as well ,
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------

[ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-1-21 17:36 編輯 ]

回復 3# 的帖子

公開宗教,可以看得到淫審處是否只傾斜於某一宗教,或者可以迫使淫審處加入不同宗教或思想的道德角度?
支持鼓勵每位離教者
Not only that people with different religious beliefs should be invited into the group, but also those without any religious belief. Since this would make more balanced judgements to represent the view of the society.

However, it seems that it is difficult to know the religious belief of different people. After all, only a few would just get certificate from religious parties, and we can't observe the mind of others directly. In addition, the religious belief of people could be changed rapidly. In what basis (observable basis) should we use to check the religious beliefs of different people?

回復 5# 的帖子

或者直接要求公開審裁員的甄選機制?
支持鼓勵每位離教者
And also requires that the reason of judging an article should not appeal to religious belief?
If, say 90% of the population is Christians, what is wrong with having a panel with 90% Christians?  What would you have felt if 99% of the poplation is atheist and 50% of the panel is Christian for the sake of balance?

What does it mean to have a balance of opinion?

If we must have every religious group in the panel, we will need: all sect of Christians (a couple hundred), Islam (at least 2), Hindu (a few million), Jedian , IPUian...etc

A secular society would just NEGLECT the religious background of someone.  Instead, try to listen to their reasoning.

If the government do adopt such a policy, HK can properly be called procecuting all religion.
--------------

Rather, I suggest following the current mechanism of the judical system.  Have citizen randomly poll into the panel.  Make it illegal for failing to attend with no proper reason.  Provided that the sample is large enough (statistically, a dozen or so will be good enough for a million people), it will reflect the public opinions properly.

In order to fix loop holes, there can also be a repeal policy.  Cases should be repeal a couple of times even if nothing change to ensure that the sample is representative.

------------------------
For your interest, the current situation

http://www.judiciary.gov.hk/tc/crt_services/pphlt/html/oat.htm

審裁委員組成審裁委員小組,由終審法院首席法官委任,任期3年,並可再獲委任。為了確保審裁處所採納的標準具代表性,並盡量符合社會規範,審裁小組的成員來自社會各階層,包括不同年齡組別、職業和專業。
審裁委員須向終審法院首席法官發出通知,才可辭去職務。 如有以下情況,終審法院首席法官亦可將其姓名從審裁委員小組名單中刪除:
    不再通常居於香港; 因任何罪行而被定罪; 被宣布為破產人;或
  • 終審法院首席法官認為其疏忽職守或不能執行職責。
有意成為審裁委員的人,可向工商及科技局通訊及科技科查詢(電話:2189 2222)。

if 終審法院首席法官 (current one 李國能)is a Christian, we are stuck with Christian. If all the volunteers are Christian, we are stuck with Christian (in fact, it is how the agency get hijacked now.  Because we did not have enough volunteer ._.)

--------------------
For the different function of the different department, we have this from the goverment

主 席 女 士 , 我 知 道 市 民 大 眾 未 必 完 全 明 白 《 條 例 》 的 條 文 及 運 作 , 特 別 是 影 視 處 及 審 裁 處 之 間 的 分 工 及 權 責 。 影 視 處 的 職 能 是 把 懷 疑 違 例 的 物 品 呈 交 至 審 裁 處 , 以 及 在 審 裁 處 評 定 物 品 類 別 後 作 出 檢 控 。 審 裁 處 全 權 負 責 評 定 物 品 類 別 , 影 視 處 沒 有 這 方 面 的 權 力 。

.. 審 裁 處's work is like a jury in a court!

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2008-1-22 00:25 編輯 ]
原帖由 抽刀斷水 於 2008-1-21 20:47 發表
或者直接要求公開審裁員的甄選機制?


o yes ,

回復 9# 的帖子

But they have!

http://www.judiciary.gov.hk/tc/crt_services/pphlt/html/oat.htm

審裁委員組成審裁委員小組,由終審法院首席法官委任,任期3年,並可再獲委任。為了確保審裁處所採納的標準具代表性,並盡量符合社會規範,審裁小組的成員來自社會各階層,包括不同年齡組別、職業和專業。
審裁委員須向終審法院首席法官發出通知,才可辭去職務。 如有以下情況,終審法院首席法官亦可將其姓名從審裁委員小組名單中刪除:

不再通常居於香港; 因任何罪行而被定罪; 被宣布為破產人;或
終審法院首席法官認為其疏忽職守或不能執行職責。
有意成為審裁委員的人,可向工商及科技局通訊及科技科查詢(電話:2189 2222)。
原帖由 抽刀斷水 於 2008-1-21 19:45 發表
公開宗教,可以看得到淫審處是否只傾斜於某一宗教,或者可以迫使淫審處加入不同宗教或思想的道德角度?


>>>> 或者可以迫使淫審處加入不同宗教或思想
o yes

greater
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-1-21 20:39 發表
Not only that people with different religious beliefs should be invited into the group, but also those without any religious belief. Since this would make more balanced judgements to represent the vie ...


>>>> Not only that people with different religious beliefs should be invitedinto the group,
>>>> but also those without any religious belief.
>>>> Since thiswould make more balanced judgements to represent the view of thesociety.

o yes , me agree


However,
it seems that it is difficult to know the religious belief ofdifferent people.
After all,
only a few would just get certificate fromreligious parties,
and
we can't observe the mind of others directly.
Inaddition,
the religious belief of people could be changed rapidly.
Inwhat basis (observable basis) should we use to check the religiousbeliefs of different people?


sorry cant quite agree

>>>> it seems that it is difficult to know the religious belief ofdifferent people.

yes , but , not too difficult , it does have 'the ways ,
let's just ask !! y[[=why]] not !!!!!???? it works !! .........

e.g. : :::::
曾當奴 does have publiccly admitted [[ when being asked ]] he's a Catholic , a devout Catholic

e.g. : :::::
http://exchristian.hk/forum/viewthread.php?tid=1329&extra=page%3D1
>>>>>>>>> 美國2008年大選總統候選人宗教信仰一覽
>>>> we can't observe the mind of others directly.
+
>>>> In what basis (observable basis)
>>>> should we use to check the religious beliefs of different people

in my own humble opinion : ::::: v dont need to `````observe'''' nor `````check'''' ,
let's just ask !! y[[=why]] not !!!!!???? it works !! ......... ask them2declare,
they should declare
they must declare
they MUST declare , their decisions 'r directly + indirectly affecting or effecting the public !!

sorry , my tone may b too heavy here ,
sorry again


[ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-1-22 01:01 編輯 ]
原帖由 weakest 於 2008-1-21 21:06 發表
And also requires that the reason of judging an article should not appeal to religious belief?


sorry cant quite get it , how about elaborating it a little bit ??
ThANKye
原帖由 dye 於 2008-1-21 23:27 發表
If, say 90% of the population is Christians, what is wrong with having a panel with 90% Christians?  What would you have felt if 99% of the poplation is atheist and 50% of the panel is Christian for t ...


>>>>  What would you have felt
>>>> if 99% of the poplation is atheist and 50% of the panel is Christian for the sake of balance?

u have made a point here , a great point , ,
expecially applicable 2 current situations of our home , hk
在dye兄的啟示下,由機制說起:

影視及娛樂事務管理處(影視處):負責把懷疑違例的物品呈交至審裁處,以及在審裁處評定物品類別後作出檢控
淫褻物品審裁處(淫審處):全權負責評定物品類別

涉嫌淫褻物品:A(比喻:通輯犯)

過程:
1. 影視處巡查並發現A(警察巡邏時發現通輯犯)
2. 影視處把A交給淫審處處理(警察把通輯犯交給法庭)
3. 淫審處把A看完後分級(法庭審訊後判決)
4. 如A屬違法物品,影視處就A作出檢控及申請禁令(如通輯犯證實有罪,由警察把他押至監獄)

嗯,淫審處像司法機構,由終審法院首席法官委任淫審處成員,的確頗有權威性。

問題是淫審處內部會如何識別A是否淫褻物品呢?有沒有一套通用指引或制度?負責委員多少人?委員要全部通過、抑或大部分通過即可呢?處長就判斷A有多大權力?假如沒有公開的話,我們怎知道機制是否公平?
支持鼓勵每位離教者
原帖由 dye 於 2008-1-21 23:27 發表
If, say 90% of the population is Christians, what is wrong with having a panel with 90% Christians?  What would you have felt if 99% of the poplation is atheist and 50% of the panel is Christian for t ...


first sorry cant quite agree, please accept my sincere apologisations

If we must have every religious group in the panel, we will need: allsect of Christians (a couple hundred), Islam (at least 2), Hindu (a fewmillion), Jedian , IPUian...etc


'the dominant sects in each group may b already more than o-k

A secular society would just NEGLECT the religious background of someone.  
Instead, try to listen to their reasoning.


>>>> Instead,
>>>> try to listen to their reasoning

sorry ,
those Chr* 'r just too smart ,
o yes ,
their reasonning may b very reasonnable , but , at the same time ,
their reasonning may also b just nothing but all excuses in disguise , who knows ?? God knows !!
ye dont experience it enough ??
---------
their reasonning may b very ambiguous ,
e.g. : :::::
````` for the goodness of the whole society ''''
````` for the better moral conducts ''''
e.t.c.
---------

>>>> If the government do adopt such a policy,
>>>> HK can properly be called procecuting all religion.

sorry , please let me say not agree , sincere apology from me ,
never as extreme as such suckingly , un-imaginably ,
but ,
perhaps , it may b due 2 that i'm too stupid ,

n'o[[no]] bad feeling , just discuss , sincere apology from me ,

cheers ThANkye , pendragon

[ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-1-22 01:29 編輯 ]
原帖由 dye 於 2008-1-21 23:27 發表
If, say 90% of the population is Christians, what is wrong with having a panel with 90% Christians?  What would you have felt if 99% of the poplation is atheist and 50% of the panel is Christian for t ...


>>>> if 終審法院首席法官 (current one 李國能)is a Christian
any 1 know whether 李國能 being a Christian ?? sorry ThANKye
原帖由 抽刀斷水 於 2008-1-22 01:01 發表
在dye兄的啟示下,由機制說起:

影視及娛樂事務管理處(影視處):負責把懷疑違例的物品呈交至審裁處,以及在審裁處評定物品類別後作出檢控
淫褻物品審裁處(淫審處):全權負責評定物品類別

涉嫌淫褻物品:A(比喻:通輯犯)

過程:
1. 影視處 ...

問題是淫審處內部會如何識別A是否淫褻物品呢?有沒有一套通用指引或制度?負責委員多少人?委員要全部通過、抑或大部分通過即可呢?處長就判斷A有多大權力?假如沒有公開的話,我們怎知道機制是否公平?


o yes , an other holy[[[[[[[[[wholly]]]]]]]]] black box ,
with-out any transparency ,
with-out any counter-balance ,
they could do it just what-ever they would

公平?

where ????

p.s.
my tone may b too harsh here,
so
so
sorry4anyinconveneince
sorry4anyinconveneince2everybody


hey mam//man//men , brothers , comrades , , please , peace , ThANKye ,

[ 本帖最後由 prussianz 於 2008-1-22 13:48 編輯 ]

回復 12# 的帖子

"sorry cant quite agree

>>>> it seems that it is difficult to know the religious belief ofdifferent people.

yes , but , not too difficult , it does have 'the ways ,
let's just ask !! y[[=why]] not !!!!!???? it works !! .........

e.g. : :::::
曾當奴 does have publiccly admitted [[ when being asked ]] he's a Catholic , a devout Catholic

e.g. : :::::
http://exchristian.hk/forum/view ... &extra=page%3D1
>>>>>>>>> 美國2008年大選總統候選人宗教信仰一覽
>>>> we can't observe the mind of others directly.
+
>>>> In what basis (observable basis)
>>>> should we use to check the religious beliefs of different people

in my own humble opinion : ::::: v dont need to `````observe'''' nor `````check'''' ,
let's just ask !! y[[=why]] not !!!!!???? it works !! ......... ask them2declare,
they should declare
they must declare
they MUST declare , their decisions 'r directly + indirectly affecting or effecting the public !!"

1. But, how can you guarantee that they won't be telling lies? If they know that people would think it is problematic if the group is formed by all Christian, and using the Christian doctrine as the rule to judge, it seems that it is of their interest to hide this fact to public (just go to 佛堂 for 1 or 2 times, or just declare that they are 無神論者, etc.).


回復 8# 的帖子
"If, say 90% of the population is Christians, what is wrong with having a panel with 90% Christians?  What would you have felt if 99% of the poplation is atheist and 50% of the panel is Christian for the sake of balance?

What does it mean to have a balance of opinion?

If we must have every religious group in the panel, we will need: all sect of Christians (a couple hundred), Islam (at least 2), Hindu (a few million), Jedian , IPUian...etc"

2. You get a point. As I said, it is something too difficult to observe (not like those information of profession, you can check it up via the database of 工會, and the academic qualification could be check up by looking at certificates). In addition, even if we assume that people don't tell lies, it seems not so practical to figure about religious belief of the whole population. There is a census for every 10 years (and 5 years if by-census are taken into account). If we use the figures of population census to figure out how much people believe in certain religion, could we use the data as a guidence in forming the group of 淫審處? (But it may have the problem that the data maybe out-dated after 1-2 years. After all, people may have their personal religious beliefs changed due to some reasons. Otherwise, how come there is ex-christians, for example?) I don't know if this idea would be practical.....


"Rather, I suggest following the current mechanism of the judical system.  Have citizen randomly poll into the panel.  Make it illegal for failing to attend with no proper reason.  Provided that the sample is large enough (statistically, a dozen or so will be good enough for a million people), it will reflect the public opinions properly.

In order to fix loop holes, there can also be a repeal policy.  Cases should be repeal a couple of times even if nothing change to ensure that the sample is representative."

3. But the problem is that: Is the panel really selected RANDOMLY? Or simply by the preference of the authority? If you think that the existing system is good enough, and the group is representative of the HK population, we may come up with a conclusion that we don't want to get: Those ask for 送檢the bible are just minority, and simply a group of disturbance..., and that the 中大學生報is really an unacceptable material...

回復 15# 的帖子

No, the analogy is incorrect.

過程:
1. 影視處巡查並發現A(警察巡邏時發現通輯犯) Right

2. 影視處把A交給淫審處處理(警察把通輯犯交給法庭)Incorrect.  淫審處 is not a court.

3. 淫審處把A看完後分級(法庭審訊後判決)Incorrect.  淫審處 grade the material.  It does not rule what to do about it.  Again, it serve like a jury, like a "professional" witness.

4. 如A屬違法物品,影視處就A作出檢控及申請禁令(如通輯犯證實有罪,由警察把他押至監獄)Incorrect.  影視處 will procecute the publisher.  It will serve both as the court and the police.

"問題是淫審處內部會如何識別A是否淫褻物品呢?有沒有一套通用指引或制度?負責委員多少人?委員要全部通過、抑或大部分通過即可呢?處長就判斷A有多大權力?假如沒有公開的話,我們怎知道機制是否公平?"

淫審處內部會如何識別A是否淫褻物品, guideline listed on the goverment web page I listed.
有沒有一套通用指引或制度? Yes
負責委員多少人?About 300, as listed on the page.
委員要全部通過、抑或大部分通過即可呢? Majority rules. As listed on the page.
處長就判斷A有多大權力?處長 do not have a vote (if there is such a position).
假如沒有公開的話,我們怎知道機制是否公平?It is disclosed as on the page.

------------------
This is the kind of question that is already asked in the Legco and is already answered.  The function of 淫審處 is to evaluate, NOT to judge.  The actual procecutiong will be done by 影視處.

-------------
Guidelines

按法例要求,審裁處在裁定及評定物品類別時,須考慮以下各項事宜:

    社會上合理的人普遍接受的道德、禮儀及言行標準; 物品或事物整體上產生的顯著效果; 擬發布或相當可能發布的對象是甚麼人,屬那一類別或年齡組別; 如屬公開展示的事物,則須考慮展示地點及相當可能觀看該事物的人屬那一類別或年齡組別;及
  • 該物品或事物是否有真正目的,還是用作掩飾不可接受的內容。

Number of fellows on the panels,

截至2007年1月1日,淫褻物品審裁處共有321名審裁員,包括227男94女。

How it is done.

在一般情況下,每次的物品評級將由1名主審裁判官及不少於2名的審裁委員負責。委員之間如有任何分歧,須以多數的決定為依歸,如人數相等,則由主審裁判官作最後決定。

-----------------
Anyone dial the number and ask because screaming they are not transparent? 2189 2222?   Or contact your government representative and see if you can get an answer from there?

[ 本帖最後由 dye 於 2008-1-22 13:31 編輯 ]
返回列表
高級模式 | 發新話題
B Color Image Link Quote Code Smilies
換一個