The Gazette 1967/71

Mr. Pelser said last night: "As long as I am Minister of Justice, and as long as this Govern ment is in power, the Immorality Act will not be scrapped." Mr. Michael Mitchell, Opposition Front Bench Spokesman on Justice, earlier demanded a commission of inquiry into the administration of the act in the light of extra ordinary withdrawal" of the Excelsior charges. Mr. Mitchell said the act was "the most dreaded law in our statute book and has caused more suicides than any other — even when merely charged." (One man accused at Excelsior shot himself to death the day after he was charged). Sources close to the Government indicated that fear of adverse publicity abroad had played a major part in the decision to withdraw the Excelsior charges, as foreign correspondents had gathered at Excelsior to cover the case. (The Irish Times) SECRETS DECISION TO PROSECUTE DEFENDED Sir Peter Rawlinson, Attorney-General said that his Labour predecessor acted "with complete propriety" in giving consent to the prosecutions in The Sunday Telegraph secrets case. He was replying to a Commons question from Mr. Michael Havers, Conservative M.P. for Wimbledon and a Q.C., asking for a statement on the role of the Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to decisions to prosecute under the Official Secrets Act. In a written reply, Sir Peter said that proceed ings under the Official Secrets Act could only begin with the consent of the Attorney-General. In the recent case, Sir Norman Skelhorn, Director of Public Prosecutions, caused the facts to be investigated, and obtained the consent of Sir Elwyn Jones, the Attorney-General in the last Labour Government, for proceedings to be instituted. "The Director and my predecessor discharged their respective functions in connection with this, as with every other case, not on behalf of the Government but as the duly constituted, in dependent authorities responsible for the enforce ment of the criminal law," added Sir Peter. 202

"Solicitors with their scale fees linked to house prices have had very good increases in view of house prices shooting up," said Mr. Ashton. He objected to them asking for more. (Daily Telegraph, 14th January, 1971)

S. AFRICA TO CENSOR DEBATE ON CENSORSHIP

South Africa, which already has one of the strictest censorships in the world, is to have a new law censoring public discussion of censorship itself. In terms of a bill published yesterday, it will be forbidden to publish details of extracts cut from films, or of any film banned altogether. A loophole in the present law, which allows the private screening of films without censorship law entitles the publications control board, which is the government's official censoring organisation, to refuse to give any reason for any of its actions —a facility of which it makes maximum use. The new bill, more ominously, also allows the board or its agents to enter any premises and seize any publications or object which might provide evidence of an offence under the law. If someone has seen a banned film in a country where it is allowed to be shown, he will be breaking the law if he comes back to South Africa and publishes his views on the film. This means that the only places in which such matters will be open to discussion when the bill becomes law is a court of law, if there is an appeal against a ban, or in parliament under the protection of privilege. The government said last night it had no inten tion of taking any action about the country's "immorality" act, which prohibits miscegenation. That statement came from the Minister of Justice. Mr. Pesler, when the Opposition in parliament in Capetown mounted a fierce attack on the Govern ment's handling of the "Excelsior scandal." In this, five white men and 14 African women were discharged on the first day of what was scheduled to be a three-week trial under the Immorality Act last week. The reason given by the prosecution was "the reluctance of state wit nesses to give evidence."