The Society has filed a further 28 complaints against Company Director Stephen Peter Crow with the Legal Team of the Companies Office and the Enforcement Unit. It alleges he has committed 28 breaches of the Companies Act 1993 as a director of CVC Group Ltd and sole director of Vixen Publications Ltd in his use on official company documents of the company name “Eden Digital Ltd” (Co No.2122974 – formerly Vixen TV Ltd,) which was incorporated on 23 April 2008 and first registered as “Eden Digital Ltd” following a name change on 26 March 2009.

The founding directors of Eden Digital Ltd (formerly Vixen TV Ltd) are Stephen Peter Crow of 13/3a Harrison Rd, Elleslie, Auckland, John Malcolm Carr,  a multimillionaire property developer and internet tax accountant, of 14/31 Greenlane Rd, Greenlane and Shirish Daddaram Vagal of 306 Bucklands Rd, Bucklands Bay Beach, Auckland. Vagal resigned as director of Eden Digital Ltd (formerly Vixen TV Ltd) on 31 March 2009 and it has always been 100% owned by CVC Group Ltd.

The Society has requested that the Enforcement Unit carefully examine the Share Register of CVC Co Ltd, particularly over the period when director Steve Crow made online records, and provide an explanation for the apparent discrepancies highlighted below in share records.

CVC Group Ltd (Co. No. 1738154): Current Company Directors John Malcolm Carr, Stephen Peter Crow and Shirish Daddaram Vagal.

First offence: In his Application to Incorporate CVC Group Ltd and register it with the Companies Office on 29 November 2005, Stephen Crow identified himself with “Eden Digital Ltd, PO Box 28051 Remuera, Auckland.” No such limited liability company by that name was registered until 26 March 2009.

(Crow recorded the registered address and address for service of the company as 45 Stanhope Road, Ellerslie, Auckland in the incorporation document and his own residential address as 15/3a Harrison Road, Elleslie Auckland. The latter address was also used at that time to identify fellow director Brian Coburn Jewell in his Consent of Director form dated 29 November 2005. The other two directors who signed consents on this date were: John Andrew Pin of 66 Rame Rd, Greenhithe, Auckland and Shirish Daddaram Vagal of 306 Bucklands Beach Rd, Bucklands Bay, Auckland. All four directors’ consent forms were forwarded by Crow to the Companies Office from Vixen Direct Ltd PO Box 28051 Remuera and he identifies himself with this company on each form. He does not use Eden Digital Ltd. Vixen Direct Ltd was a registered company in 2005 so no problems here. Dermott Malley of 154 Gilbertson Rd, Rd 3, Napier, was appointed director on 3 December 2005. His Consent form was submitted to the Companies Office by Steve Crow of Vixen Direct Ltd. Again no mention of Eden Digital Ltd so again no problem).

Second Offence: In his Online particulars of directors filed on 8 December 2005 relating to the appointment of Dermott Malley, Crow identifies himself with Eden Digital Ltd, Remuera, PO Box 28051 Auckland.

Third Offence: The Notice of Issue of Shares for CVC Group Ltd on 10 February 2006 was submitted by Stephen Crow Eden Digital Ltd, PO Box 28951 Remuera. This was on offence for reasons given above.

Offences 4-16: In a series of online entries from 10 February 2006 to 22 May 2006, relating to CVC Group Ltd shares and shareholding, Crow again uses the company name Eden Digital Ltd to identify himself.

Offences 17-18: In his Online Annual Returns for CVC Group Ltd for both 2006 and 2007, filed on 13 June 2006 and 14 February 3007 respectively, Crow again uses the name Eden Digital Ltd, PO Box 28051” to identify himself.

Offences 19-20: In his 2008 Annual Return filed on 12 February 2008 he commits an offence by again using the name Eden Digital Ltd to identify himself and this time gives a false address for the non-existent company – 57A Walmsley Rd, Otahuhu, Auckland. Eden Digital Ltd, first registered by that name on 26 March 2009 has never had a registered office at this address. It has always been 45 Stanhope Rd, Elleslie, Auckland. On 12 February 2008 Crow had his official residential address as 57A Walmsley Rd, Otahuhu, Auckland.

Offence 21: Crow submitted the CVC Group Ltd 2009 Annual Return on 24 March 2009 and identifies himself with Eden Digital Ltd – two days before the company name is registered.

CVC Group Ltd Shareholding Records:

The Society requests that the Enforcement Unit carefully examine the Share Register of the Company and provide an explanation for the apparent discrepancies noted below.

On 29 November 2005 when the CVC Group Ltd was incorporated, Director Stephen Peter Crow made an online application recording the total company shares as 75,999. However, in listing the share parcel breakdown below he listed HWGA Co Ltd holding 75,999 shares, Director John Andrew Pin and Brian Coburn Jewett holding 12,000 shares each, and himself holding 1 share. This is a total of 100,000 shares not only 75,999 as Crow has recorded.

Then in the next online entry Notice of Issue of Shares dated 10 February 2006 Crow records the total company shares as 960,000 which appears to be 40,000 short of the actual true number (100,000). He records that 884,001 were issued on 31 January 2006 but this does not tally with his separate online entry – Particulars of Shareholding – filed on the same day, where he gives a summary of the share parcel changes:

Two new shareholders are issued with parcels: Pirika Investments Ltd, (150,000) and Shirish Daddaram Vagal (100,000). The shareholding of HWAG Co Ltd is increased from 75,999 to 509,999 with the issue of 434,000 shares and both John Pin and Brian Jewett have their share parcels increased by 88,000 each, from 12,000 to 100,000. There is no mention of what happens to Crow’s one share.

The total of newly issued shares is 150,000 + 100,000 + 434,000 + 2 times (88,000). This equals 856,000 NOT 884,001 as entered by Crow at 10:30:18 on 10 February 2006. It would appear that 28,001 shares are unaccounted for.

Then on 28 February in an online amendment to share parcels, Crow records that each of the parcels of 100,000 shares issued to each of the directors John Pin and Brian Jewett have been increased by 20,000 each. This means 40,000 new shares were issued. This brings the total of shares issued to 100,000 + 860,000 + 40,000 = 1,000,000

Then on the same day Crow records online that HGWA Co Ltd has increased its shareholding by 75,000 from 509,999 to 584,999. This would bring the total company shares issued to 1,075,000.

Then on 27 March 2006 Crow records that his one share is removed from him and moved to HWGA Co Ltd, moving its total increased by 75,000 from 584,999 to 585,000 shares. There is also a record of Graham William Brimble being issued 25,000 shares on this date.

Currently 99% of CVC Group Ltd total shares (1,746,000) are owned by its directors and or partners and/or companies they direct or own. 40% are owned by HWGA Co Ltd, which has a sole director Steve Crow (co-director and ex-wife Gaylene Sharon Rogers resigned on 16 July 2009). Velocity Partners Ltd with sole director John Malcolm Carr of 14/31 Greenlane Rd, Remuera owns 39% and 8% owned by Electronic Publishing Ltd of which he is sole director – a total of 47% owned by Carr-directed companies. Shirish Daddaram Vagal and Gulshan Shirish Vagal of 306 Bucklands Beach Rd, Buckland Bay, Auckland, owns 10% and Leanne and Larry Osborn of Fitzroy, New Plymouth own 1%.

Vixen Publications Ltd (Co. No. 1629978) (formerly Vixen Media Ltd, Formerly Uncensored Media Ltd). Registered Office and Address for Service 45 Stanhope Road, Elleslie, Auckland.

The company was incorporated 10 May 2005 under the name Uncensored Media, underwent a name change to Vixen Media Ltd on 12 February 2007 and then became Vixen Publications Ltd on 2 July 2007. Its sole director has always been Stephen Peter Crow who provided his residential address as 15/3a Harrison Rd, Elleslie, Auckland on 10 May 2005. The Company is currently 100% owned by CVC Group Ltd of which Crow is one of its three directors. Its registered office 45 Stanhope Rd, Elleslie, Auckland.

Offence 22: The Application to Incorporate the Company was filed by Stephen Peter Crow, Eden Digital Ltd, PO Box 28051 Remuera, Auckland. No such company was registered prior to 26 March 2009. This is a breach of the Companies Act 1993.

Offences 23-24: In two documents filed on 11 April 2006 – Particulars of Shareholding – Crow again used the name Eden Digital Ltd to identify himself. In one he records that his one share had been transferred to CVC Group Ltd and in the other he records that 99 shares owned by HWGA Co Ltd have been transferred to CVC Group Ltd of which he is one of three current directors.

Offence 25: In his online 2006 Annual Return dated 11 October 2006, he again uses Eden Digital Ltd PO Box 28051 to identify himself.

Offence 26: In an online record of company name change filed on 12 February 2007, Mr Crow again uses the name Eden Digital Ltd this time giving the contact address as 45 Stanhope Road, Elleslie.

(On 12 October 2007 Crow filed an online Particulars of Director record of his change of residential address from 15/3a Harrison Rd, Elleslie, Auckland to 57A Walmsley Rd, Otahuhu, Auckland (effective 1 October 2007). There is no mention of Eden Digital Ltd on this document. Neither is there a mention of it on his 2007 or 2008 Annual Returns filed on 12 October 2007 and 14 October 2008, respectively. In the latter return he recorded his residential address as 57A Walmsley Rd, Otahuhu, Auckland).

When Vixen Publications Ltd was incorporated on 10 May 2005, HWGA Co Ltd owned 99 shares and Steve Crow 1 share. Later transfers led to CVC Group Ltd of which Crow is one of three directors, owning all the shares. On the incorporation document he gave his residential address as 15/3a Harrison Rd, Elleslie, Auckland until he notified the change to 57A Walmsley Rd, Otahuhu, effective 1 October 2007.

The latter address was used by Crow’s co-director to HWGA Co Ltd, Gaylene Sharon Rogers, when she signed a Consent of Director certificate filed on 20 April 2006 and when she resigned on 16 July 2009. In an online directors update dated 16 July 2009, Steve Crow gives his residential address as 45 Stanhope Road, Elleslie, Auckland, effective 15 August 2008. This is also the registered office address of not only Vixen Publications Ltd, but also CVC Group Ltd, HGWA Co Ltd (effective 5/08/08), and Sidefx Ltd and Eden Digital Ltd (formerly Vixen TV Ltd).

Vixen Direct Ltd (Co. No. 1738131) Struck Off 29 March 2007

Vixen Direct Ltd was incorporated on 5 December 2005 and was struck off on the Companies List on 29 March 2007. Its registered office was 45 Stanhope Road, Ellerslie, Auckland and its sole director was Stephen Peter Crow who gave his residential address as 15/3a Harrison Rd, Ellerslie, Auckland. CVC Group Ltd owned 100% of the company shares and both companies share the same registered office address. The Consent of Shareholder of proposed Company form was signed and filed by Crow acting for CVC Group Ltd. No Annual Returns were ever filed for the company by Mr Crow.

Offence 27: In his application to incorporate this company dated 5 December 2005 Stephen Crow used the company name Eden Digital Ltd, PO Box 28051 Remuera to identify himself. In his Consent of Director Application and Consent of Shareholder Application of the proposed company “Vixen Direct Ltd”, both faxed to the Companies Office at 15:09 on 4 December 2005, he identifies the person completing the form as “Stephen Crow, Postal address Vixen Direct Ltd, PO Box 28051 Remuera, Auckland.” He used the company name twice before it was even incorporated.

Offence 28 & 29: Crow signed the Consent of Shareholder document as a director on behalf of CVC Group Ltd (the shareholder: 100 shares held) and recorded that it was “Completed by Vixen Direct Limited, PO Box 28051, Remuera, Auckland”. No such company with that name existed at the time the three documents were submitted. He did the same in his Consent of Director Application.

Les Obstacles de l’Armour Ltd (formerly Vixen Direct Ltd). Co. No. 608726. (In Liquidation on 6 March 2006). Incorporated 20/12/93.

The company name Vixen Direct Ltd was registered by Crow with the Companies Office from 31 January 2001 to 29 November 2005. On the latter date its name was changed to Private Media Ltd and then on 15 February 2006 to Les Obstacles de l’Armour Ltd (prior to liquidation). After 29 November 2005 the company name “Vixen Direct Ltd” was available for anyone including Crow to use.

Venue: Connolly Hall, Guilford Tce.
(off Hill St), Thorndon, Wellington

Date: Monday 8th June

Members’ Only AGM: 6.45pm – 7.20 p.m.
Followed by Free Public Address
(All welcome)
7.30 p.m. to 8.15 p.m.

GUEST SPEAKER

John Terris Q.S.O. ANZIM

Topic: “Media Matters in Society”

John James Terris is a New Zealand politician who initially represented the Labour Party in the NZ parliament. In that capacity he held the positions of Acting Speaker, Deputy Speaker and Chairman of Committees of the House of Representatives from 1984 to 1990

He represented the electorate of Western Hutt in Parliament from 1978 to 1990 when he was defeated by National’s Joy McLauchlan, one of a number of losses contributing to the fall of the Fourth Labour Government.

He was later the politically independent Mayor of Lower Hutt, from 1995 to 2004. He is the only person ever to have been both MP and Mayor in the Hutt Valley where he has lived since 1965.

His early working life was in radio and television and he is an ordained Anglican priest.

He is currently the President of Media Matters in NZ, (www.viewers.org.nz)an advocacy group which campaigns against gratuitous sex and violence in the electronic media. He is a member of the Hutt Mana Charitable Trust and patron of a number of community groups in the Hutt area

He is a writer, publisher and broadcaster. His autobiography “Being Who You Are” (Steele Roberts) was published in 2004. He is a member of the Queen’s Service Order and a holder of the 1990 Medal.

Source: Wikipedia

The Society was today granted leave by the Secretary of Internal Affairs, Mr Brendan Boyle, to apply to the Film and Literature Board of Review to review the classification of the computer game Grand Theft Auto IV (unedited US version). The game was classified R18 by the Chief Censor’s Office.

The Secretary acknowledges in his decision dated 21 July that he received the Society’s application seeking leave, on 27 May 2008 and states in par 18-20:

“I found no evidence in the application to suggest that it was vexatious … I then considered whether the application for leave was frivolous (trivial, needless or unfounded, or so untenable that it could not succeed) under the Guidelines… I found that the application for leave from the SPCS appeared to be tenable in that it could possibly succeed. The application was therefore not frivolous. It is also my view that the SPCS has established an arguable prima facie case for the application to be considered by the Board.” (Full decision available http://www.dia.govt.nz).

The film “End of the Spear” has had its classification downgraded from R16 to R13 following a successful appeal by the Society against the classification decision issued by the Chief Censor’s Office. The Society contended in its written and oral submisssion to the Board that the nature of the depiction of violence in the film – medium level violence – could not possibly justify an R16 classification. The nine member Film and Literature Board of Review agreed and in a unanimous decision, issued to the Society on Wednesday this week, took the view that 13, 14 and 15 year old children would not be harmed by exposure to the violence which formed only a small part of a compelling Christian message of forgiveness and redemption that is told based on the “true story” of the missionary outreach in the 1950s, to the violent South American Waodani Indian tribe. A revised censor’s note from the Board, alerts viewers to the medium level violence involving tribal warfare that some might find “disturbing”.

This is the second successful appeal by the Society in recent years involving a major Christian film that has led to its classification rating – issued by the Chief Censor’s Office – being downgraded by the Board. The Society made both oral and written submissions to the Board to overturn the R16 classification of Mel Gibson’s blockbuster film “The Passion”, and this led it to being reclassified R15. The applicant in this case was the film’s distributor and the Society opted to take a role as an interested party.

The Society has as one of its six objectives: the promotion of freedom of expression, within the boundaries of good law that safeguards the public good from injury.

Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc.

A Registered Charitable Entity with the Charities Commission

P.O. Box 13-683 Johnsonville

5 June 2008

Attention

Ms Claudia Elliott

President

Film & Literature Board of Review

C/- Mr Owen Davie

Board Secretary

Application for Interim Restriction Order under s. 49 of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 (“the Act”) with respect to The Peaceful Pill Handbook (New International Revised Edition).

Dear Ms Elliott

In a letter dated 29 May 2008, the Secretary of Internal Affairs, Mr Brenan Boyle, granted the Society leave to apply to the Film and Literature Board of Review for a review of the classification of The Peaceful Pill Handbook (New International Revised Edition). The Society has made its application to the Board on the prescribed form and paid its application fee.

The Society contends that “it is in the public interest [for the President] to … make such an order” – for the following reasons 1-4 (note that this matter “shall be dealt with [by the President] as soon as practable”)

1. The Society has already established to the complete satisfaction of the Secretary and his officials that there is a prima facie case for a review of the classification of the R18 publication. In other words he has acknowledged that there is an arguable case, as set out in great detail by the Society, that the publication should be classified “objectionable” with reference to s. 3 of the Act, rather than classified R18 as determined by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC decision registered on 8 May 2008).

2. The arguable case that persuaded the Secretary and his officials to grant relief to the applicant by way of a review by the Board – relied on showing that the publication, even if made available only to those aged 18 years and over, still constitutes an “objectionable” publication – one that is “injurious to the public good”  – on the grounds that its content is in breach of the censorship standards set out under s. 3 of the Act. The Secretary clearly took into account the overall impact of the book etc. on persons 18 years of age and over, acknowledging its very real potential for harm with respect to young adults (18-24) and others.

3. If a publication is constituted “objectionable” simpliciter under s 3(2) or s. 3(3) of the Act, because of the manner of its treatment of one or more matters specified in the s. 3(1) “gateway” (sex, violence, etc); then ANY dissemination of such material to the public through bookshop sales, internet sales or downloads, mail-order sales etc within New Zealand, constitute serious offence under the Act. And given that an arguable case exists, in the view of the Secretary, that this publication should be classified “objectionable”, then the issuing of an interim restriction order is warranted, because it serves to safeguard the “public good” until the classification of the publication can be resolved.

4. Following the release of the OFLC decision on the book, its co-author Dr Nitschke was quoted in the media as “thrilled” that it will be soon be available for sale to the public in New Zealand bookshops – by the end of May. Exit International website reports have boasted of its soon-to-be availability through bookshops and its availability through Exit worshops to be held in NZ in July 2008. The Society has contacted a number of major NZ book retailers and been told that it will soon be available for purchase. The book is already available in NZ via internet orders and can be purchased and brought into the country legally at present by anyone 18 years of age and over, and then onsold.

See:

Controversy in NZ over Australian euthanasia book

PM – Tuesday, 13 May , 2008  18:46:00

Reporter: Kerri Ritchie

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2243906.htm

“Philip Nitschke hopes his book will be in New Zealand shops within a fortnight.”

The Society urges the President to recognises the legal imperitive “shall” contained in s. 49)(2) of the Act and expedite the matter dealt with in this application “as soon as practable”.

It also notes that the Secretary and his officials determined that the Society’s application for a review was not vexatious or frivolous.

If you require clarification on any matter relating to this application, please contact me as soon as possible.

Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc.                      

cc. Secretary Internal Affairs, Mr Brendan Boyle

Mr Peter McKenzie QC

THE SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

P.O. Box 13-683 Johnsonville

http://www.spcs.org.nz

Submission to:

Mr Brendan Boyle

Secretary of Internal Affairs

Department of Internal Affairs

Wellington

28 May 2008

Re: Grand Theft Auto IV (unedited US version) [also known as or GTA 4].

The Society has sought leave under s. 47(2)(e) of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 (“the Act”), to apply to the Film and Literature Board of Review (“the Board”) for a review of the classification of the highly controversial console game Grand Theft Auto IV (unedited US version) [also known as or GTA 4]. As noted in our application for leave dated 27 May 2008, the unedited game was classified R18 by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (“the OFLC”) on the 21^st May 2008.

An earlier version of this game was also classified R18 by the OFLC in a decision dated 27 February 2008 (OFLC 800191). The OFLC has chosen not to release that full decision on its website, as it has done for the controversial R18 book – The Peaceful Pill Handbook. However, the Society has obtained a copy of the OFLC decision for the edited GTA4 publication and has published it on its website so that the public can be alerted to the vile, toxic, pernicious and “crime-promoting” (to quote the Dominion Post) content in this game.

See: http://www.spcs.org.nz/2008/chief-censors-office-report-on-grand-theft-auto-2/

Take 2 Interactive Software distributes the edited version of the game in New Zealand:

See: http://www.spcs.org.nz/2008/grand-theft-auto-iv-who-is-the-nz-distributor-profiting-from-this-offensive-crime-promoting-game/

The Society wishes to set out some of our reasons for seeking a reclassification of the unedited version of console game. In summary it contends that:

1) A prima facie case for a reclassification of the publication can be established,

2) Relief Sought by Society: The game should be classified “objectionable” under ss. 3(2)(f), 3(3)(a)(i), s3(3)(d) and 3(4)(a)-(f) of the Act.

3) Professional agencies and senior qualified experts working in the field of youth crime, “at-risk” youth (15-17) and young adults (18-24 years), mental health services and Police Legal Services and drug law enforcement, should be asked by the Board of Review to make submissions on the classification of this “crime-promoting” console game, in the light of the acknowledged potential of the book to influence vulnerable at-risk individuals to commit criminal acts. The New Zealand Prostitutes Collective should also be consulted with regard to the game’s treatment of prostitutes.

4) It is in the public interest for a thorough review of the classification of this game to take place.

Introduction:

GTA 4 is a console game formatted for play on the Xbox 360 console. The game is the latest instalment in a series of popular free roaming, or open-ended, games from the development company Rockstar Games. The game is plot-driven, broadly fitting into the action/drama. It tells the story of Nico Bellie, a fresh-off-the-boat Eastern European immigrant to Liberty City (modelled on the real New York city). Nico stays with his cousin Roman, a loser with dangerous levels of gambling debt, and begins to perform odd jobs to keep his head above water. Nico’s ulterior motive in visiting Liberty City is to try and find the man responsible for betraying his friends.

As with the previous versions of Grand Theft Auto the game utilises a third-person perspective. The storyline is progressed through cinematic scripted sequences, and supported by a wide range of mission objectives that draw the player into a vortex of criminal activity and morally repugnant corrupt activity. The game world is immersive and fully realised. It is deliberately designed to entice the player into deeper and deeper levels of criminal activity but does draw the line by not allowing the player to dismember his victim’s body, commit sexual acts on the body or sexually exploit young people. However, innocent victims can be incinerated, garrotted to death, repeatedly abused using vile obscenities, demeaned, degraded and dehumanised. The objectification of women as sexual objects to be used and degraded and disposed of is evident as a subtext, if not as a more overt message.

The unedited version of the Grand Theft Auto IV (GTA 4) game differs from the edited version in a number of features including the more explicit content contained in the sex scenes involving prostitutes. Players are able to manipulate the main character allowing him to visit brothels, etc. engage in sexual acts with prostitutes and then kill them using a range of techniques, including garrotting them. Innocent victims can be disposed of by incineration using a Molotov cocktail. The audio and visual presentation of the sex scenes are graphic and gratuitous – utilising camera angles and sound effects one would expect to see in large budget films. Some games experts, reporting in reviews on overseas websites, have described the visual quality, when using high definition screens, as better than large budget films.

It has been reported that the OFLC has expressed little concern over this gratuitous sexual content of the game, for the reason that “no genital contact” is actually portrayed. However, the Society asks the OFLC: Since when did genital content become the proverbial line-in-the-sand defining what is “objectionable” in sexual contact? Such content is a regular feature of the many hundreds of sexually explicit DVDs and videos that are classified as R18 by the OFLC for the home entertainment market. Such content is also found in films depicting sexual violence (rape) and sodomy, cleared for the cinema screen by Chief Censor, Mr Bill Hastings (e.g. the French film Baise-Moi, transl. Fu#k Me)

Subject Matter Gateway

Matters such as sex

One of the many strong in-game violence scenes occurs when a person is hit by a Molotov cocktail. The victim is shown running to and fro on fire before collapsing. The level of cruelty is stronger because of the length of time it takes for the person to die. This is clearly designed to titillate the gamer as the length of depiction is over-the-top (gratuitous). Liberal critics have called it sickening, lurid and pornographic.

The scripted sequences also feature a range of violence, such as people being shot in the head with the contents spewing our n all directions. These are shown in a very cinematic way, utilising camera angles and sound effects one would expect to see in large budget films that glamorise violence (eg. Kill Bill: Volume 1).

In terms of s3(2)(f) “…. infliction of extreme violence or extreme cruelty”…. the game rewards players for engaging in criminal activity that involves such extreme activities. The freedom players are given to repeat such atrocities and the nature of the reward system has the potential to promote sado-masochism, violence, sexual violence and perversions, the abuse of women etc.

In terms of s3(3)(d) the game contains the potential for anti-social and criminal behaviour through the freedom Niko has to hijack cars and kill civilians and police with an array of offensive weapons. The missions themselves also involve Niko performing criminal behaviour, such as shakedowns of business owners who refuse to pay protection money, and killing other criminals. The criminal behaviour is the main focus of the game.

The power the police have to kill or arrest is a legitimate power invested in them by the state, although it is subject to review processes etc. These are not unfettered powers and police are sworn members of an agency of government empowered to uphold the law in a democratic state. In contrast, the player is encouraged to wantonly breach the criminal law and commit acts that are crimes against persons and property. Furthermore, this is done to entertain, titillate and amuse the player.

3A Publication may be age-restricted if it contains highly offensive language likely to cause serious harm.

The publication contains frequent use of coarse language in keeping with the characters’ backgrounds. Examples include use of word “f#ck” and its derivatives (“mother-f#cker” etc), and the word “cu#t”. This constant stream of obscenities advances misogyny and demeans, degrades and dehumanises women in particular.

Section 3(4) Additional matters to be considered

s3(4)(a) The dominant effect of the publication as a whole

The dominant effect of the publication as a whole is to titillate, entertain and engage players within the mindset of an action drama that glamorises: criminal activities, the infliction of extreme violence or extreme cruelty, drug-taking, the killing of law enforcement officers and innocent members of the public etc.

s3(4)(b) The impact of the medium in which the publication is presented

The highly interactive nature of a Xbox 369 console game, allowing for complex and sophisticated game-play with realistic graphics and sound effects, combined with its pernicious crime-promoting character – will impact significantly on the minds of young adults in particular, as well as adults, who have a propensity for criminal behaviour and enjoy engaging in anti-social behaviour.

s3(4)(c) The character of the publication, including any merit, value or importance it has in relation to literary, artistic, social, cultural, educational, scientific, or other matter.

The publication has no merit and is injurious to the public good.

s3(4)(d) The persons, classes of persons, or age groups of the persons to whom the publication is intended or is likely to be made available.

The publication is aimed at young adult gamers; in the sure knowledge of its makers that it will be accessed by many male youths below the age of 18 years. Its depictions of violence and cruelty, offensive and gratuitous sexual content, and criminal anti-social elements, are all designed to inject a high-level of excitement into the game programme that appeals, in particular to young men and boys.

s3(4)(e) The purpose for which the publication is to be used

The publication is intended as entertainment.

BILL OF RIGHTS CONSIDERATIONS

Discussion of Bill if Rights Consideration

Section 3(1) considerations have been weighed against relevant provisions of the NZBR Act. Given the manner in which the game treats matters of extreme violence, extreme cruelty and criminal activities, the classification imposed on this game – as objectionable – is a reasonable limitation on the freedom of expression contained in the Bill of Rights, and is demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. Any limitation on the console game’s availability to minimum age restrictions would be pointless and largely ineffective. Research has shown that earlier versions of Grand Theft Auto that have been rated R18, have all been regularly played and accessed by tens of thousands of New Zealand young men, well under the age of 18 years. A total ban on GTA4 (unedited version) would prevent injury to the public good.

Conclusion

Injurious to the Public Good

The banning of this publication that is so injurious to the public good is well justified given the manner in which it deals with matters of violence, cruelty and crime. The potential for the player’s character to commit numerous gratuitous acts of violence upon unsuspecting members of the public and the police, as well as frequently engage in extreme acts of anti-social and illegal behaviour, demonstrates that it has no merit whatsoever in a democratic society. This kind of pernicious content would be welcomed by those seeking to train people in the mindset of criminal activity, but it has no redeeming value for New Zealand society. The game has the very real potential to desensitise or inure over the long term, vulnerable minds to this type of criminal and anti-social behaviour, and trivialises crime, promiscuity and perversions through presenting it them amusing, sexually titillating or exciting. The likelihood of injury to the public good is avoided by banning this game.

Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc.

Cc. Mr Owen Davie, Board of Review Secretary and Peter McKenzie QC

The classification decision Issued by the Office of Film and Literature Classification on GTA4 (unedited) can be viewed at:

The Society for Promotion of Community Standards [SPCS] has written to the Film and Literature Board of Review [see letter below] seeking a review of the decision [web-link below] to approve the book for R18 release.

New Zealand chief censor Bill Hastings says Dr Nitschke’s The Peaceful Pill Handbook is a well-intentioned book for the terminally-ill and elderly.

However, Mr Hastings says several areas have been edited so people do not think suicide is to be taken lightly.

Australian censors banned the book last year.

The society’s executive director, David Lane, says the material breeds a culture of death in New Zealand and is not solely a matter for the chief censor.

Mr Lane says the society is seeking an assurance that those who deal with depressive and suicidal people have been consulted over the release of the book.

He says there will be calls for bookshops to be publicly shunned, should they stock the title.

Posted at 4:12pm on 12 May 2008 on Radio NZ website:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/latest/200805121612/1fbd4b23

Appendix

For classification decision issued by Chief Censor’s Office on the revised Peaceful Pill Handbook,  see:

http://www.censorship.govt.nz/pdfword/peaceful%20pill%20s38.pdf

Letter sent to Secretary: