400. In his reply, the representative of the State party said that the Data Protection Act, 1984, had been generally successful in accomplishing its purpose. Although the Act did not apply in the dependent territories, information there was protected by rules of confidentiality, and any breach of that confidentiality would be dealt with appropriately. The Security Services At!t represented the first statutory text covering the secret service and contained new safeguards and specified remedies. Complaints by organieations that were the target of investigations could be reviewed by a commissioner appointed under the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act. Interference with telephone communications in Song Kong could be authorized under the Telecommunications Ordinance in the public interest and on the specific approval of the Governor if there was a risk to security. bzei!.m..of.rehiaion: national, racial or urs3li.~M.sf~.~~~~~.war.aod reliaioyS hatred and imiimmua freedom of association 401. With reference to that issue, members of the Committee wished to know whether there had been any evolution in the Government’s position since the submission of the report in respect of the desirability of legislation relating to blasphemy, blasphemous libel and the right to seek information; whether the 1989 Official Secrets Act encompassed defence of the public good and whether this Act applied also to the dependent territories; what had been the effects of the Broadcasting Ban of 1988 and what was the outcome of the judicial review referred to in the report: what had been the impact of the 1989 Broadcasting Bill on freedom of expression : what was the role of the new Radio Authority: what was the status of the proposal to replace the Press Ccuncil with a Press Complaints Commission and what the latter’s competence would be; and whether there were any legal criteria for determining that an organisation should be proscribed under section 1 of the Terrorism Act of 198ga 402. In addition, it was inquired whether the Government intended to further emend the Summary Offences Ordinance and the Education Ordinance in the interest of greater freedom of expression: whether the United Kingdom had specified remedies in order to comply with the recent judgement of the European Court of Human Rights concerning restriction6 on the publication of msterial about trials in progress: what the maximum punishment for membership of a proscribed organisation was and whether mere membership in the organieation, in the absence of any other illegal activity, was in itself an of fence: why the scope of blasphemy laws in the United Kingdom extended only to Christianity; whether the distinction between the Church of England and other churches was objective and reasonable) and what obstacles existed to a total separation of Church and State. Clarification was also sought of the psovisions of the Cable and Broadcasting Act 1984, under which the independence of radio and television could be restricted in the interest of maintaining political impartiality and, with respect to Bong Kong, of provisions of the Noise Control Ordinance and the Public Order Ordinance, which seemed to laqitimize restrictions to the right to peaceful assembly as set forth in article 21 of the Covenant: of the nature of the contrJls applied when public gatherings exceeded 200 persons; and of article 23 of the Basic LRW of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, which stated that laws would be enacted to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies. -lOO-