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 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:

PM – Tuesday, 13 May , 2008  18:46:00

Reporter: Kerri Ritchie

BRENDAN TREMBATH: In New Zealand, right to life groups are outraged at a decision allowing a pro-euthanasia book co-written by Philip Nitschke to be sold in the country.
The Peaceful Pill Handbook was banned in Australia last year, but an edited version has been cleared for sale to New Zealanders over the age of 18.
While opponents are demanding the decision be reviewed, Philip Nitschke is now vowing to make another attempt to get his book into Australian shops.
New Zealand correspondent Kerri Ritchie reports.
KERRI RITCHIE: There in black and white, The Peaceful Pill Handbook outlines ways people can commit suicide.
Philip Nitschke hopes his book will be in New Zealand shops within a fortnight.

You can also listen to the story in REAL AUDIO and WINDOWS MEDIA and MP3 formats.

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

PHILIP NITSCHKE: We went to great lengths to try and address some of the concerns in the very detailed opinion that had been provided by chief censor Bill Hastings when he’s decided that the first version could not be distributed and we’re pleased that we seem to have addressed those issues.
KERRI RITCHIE: The book was banned in New Zealand last July.
But late last week, the Office of Film and Literature Classification overturned that decision.
Philip Nitschke says his book got the okay after 15 pages were revised and a couple of diagrams were removed.
PHILIP NITSCHKE: That relates particularly to areas where there’s been some concern about the fact that they direct or instruct them how to break the law. The essential material interestingly is still there.
It provides enough material of a practical nature, reliable, accurate and practical nature for people when they get the material that’s in this version to be able to affect a peaceful end of their life at the time of their choosing.
KERRI RITCHIE: The book can now be sold sealed to people over the age of18.
New Zealand’s chief censor Bill Hastings has defended his decision to approve the book, with an R18 classification, saying it was the most he could impose after the law was changed in 2005.
Right to life groups are appalled.
The Society for Promotion of Community Standards has written to the Film and Literature Board of Review demanding the decision be reversed.
Executive director David Lane.
DAVID LANE: Well our main concerns are that this book has the potential to be a pernicious influence amongst those who are vulnerable, particularly young people who have difficulties with relationships and depression who, for whatever reason do consider suicide as a way of opting out of life.
KERRI RITCHIE: He says the publisher has been cunning; getting approval in New Zealand before making another attempt for clearance in Australia.
DAVID LANE: What he’s done is he’s used the services of the chief censor’s office to determine from, shall we say a Kiwi perspective, what are all the phrases and sentences and paragraphs that are problematic and these have all been carefully pinpointed by Mr Bill Hastings, the chief censor.
He’s done the publisher a great service to some extent by clarifying all these and largely at taxpayer’s expense because what the publisher has paid by way of an application fee to get this done is minimal compared to the extent to which the chief censor has carried out his work here.
KERRI RITCHIE: He says the handbook is the last thing New Zealand needs.
DAVID LANE; I know that people say that the concern of the writer is to allow older people to look at their options late in life but when we talk about suicide in New Zealand we are very, very ashamed by the fact that we have one of the worst, if not the worst track records of developed countries.
The number of young people that commit suicide every year is something horrendous. And when this material is readily available through bookshops, it does the rounds, it gets passed around, people are curious, people who are vulnerable get access to this material and we’re keen to see young people who are vulnerable safeguarded from material that is injurious to the public good.
KERRI RITCHIE: Philip Nitschke says he hopes Australia authorities will now re-think their decision to ban the book.
PHILIP NITSCHKE: Obviously it’s a version which has been produced specifically for New Zealand, although we will be of course re-presenting that to the Australian censor now for their consideration after we’ve got the detailed set of reasons as to why it was accepted in New Zealand.
KERRI RITCHIE: Right to life groups say they will call for the shops which stock the book to be publicly shunned.
This is Kerri Ritchie in Auckland reporting for PM.

_______________________________________________________________

This is a transcript from PM. The program is broadcast around Australia at 5:10pm on Radio National and 6:10pm on ABC Local Radio.

You can also listen to the story in REAL AUDIO and WINDOWS MEDIA and MP3 formats.

Mark Colvin presents PM Monday to Friday from 5:10pm on Radio National and 6:10pm on ABC Local Radio. Join Mark for the latest current affairs, wrapping the major stories of each

About the Program

PM is one of the grand institutions of Australian public broadcasting. The program celebrated its 30th anniversary last July – three decades of reporting Australia and the world.

It was the first Australian current affairs program to use journalists, not announcers or actors, as hosts. The founding comperes were John Highfield and Laurie Bryant. Tim Bowden was the executive producer and reporters included Ray Martin, Paul Barber and Paul Murphy.

Huw Evans anchored the program for 12 years, followed by Paul Murphy, Ellen Fanning, Monica Attard and now Mark Colvin.

PM’s timeslot at the end of the day has always given it a strong position from which to produce commentary and analysis on the political events of the moment, both in Canberra and the state capitals.

The PM team produces ABC Radio’s Budget Special each year. The program came live from Canberra for the full two weeks of the Constitutional Convention and Mark Colvin joined chief political correspondent, Matt Peacock, for live coverage of the federal election.

PM has had a broader international perspective from the beginning too. Bowden pioneered the use of a more informal style in interviewing the ABC’s network of foreign correspondents, and the foreign bureau’s work has always played an important part in the program.

PM is a national forum of enduring value. It is well placed for another three decades of public broadcasting.

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/aboutus.htm

Submission to:

Mr Brendan Boyle

Secretary of Internal Affairs

Department of Internal Affairs

Wellington

15 May 2008

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 pro-euthanasia book The Peaceful Pill Handbook (New Revised International Edition) by Philip Nitschke and Fiona Stewart. An earlier version of this book was banned in New Zealand by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (“the OFLC”) in a decision dated 18 March 2007 (OFLC 700240) and it remains banned. It was also banned last year in Australia, in a unanimous decision issued by the seven-member Australian Classification Review Board.1

The Society wishes to set out some of our reasons for seeking a reclassification of the New Revised International Edition of this book which has been classified R18 in New Zealand by our Chief Censor’s Office in its decision dated 8 May 2008 (OFLC No. 800267). In summary we contend that:

1. A prima facie case for a reclassification of the book can be established,

2. The book should be classified “objectionable” under s 3(3) and 3(4) of the Act.

3. Professional agencies and senior qualified experts working in the field of youth suicide prevention, “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 revised edition, in the light of the acknowledged potential of the book to influence vulnerable at-risk individuals to commit suicide, aid and abet suicide (a criminal offence), or be involved in other forms of serious physical harm.

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

1. The Prima Facie Case for Review.

The book’s clinical accounting of meticulously planned suicides by various methods, its sometimes self-congratulatory do-it-yourself ethos and its many photographs and diagrams could appeal to younger viewers, especially those already contemplating suicide or considering assisting others to commit such acts. Aiding and abetting someone to commit suicide and any attempt to cover up such involvement, are criminal offences in New Zealand (see later discussion). The book may have the effect of making self-inflicted death appear acceptable and even desirable as a means to solve life’s problems for such readers, given its approving and encouraging tone with respect to suicide.

The concept of a publication serving to “promote or support” or having the tendency to promote or support a defined activity or act, is integral to s. 3(2) and s3(3) of the Act – both sections setting out the nature of content that constitutes a publication “objectionable”. For example s3(3)(d) refers to depiction or description that “promotes or encourages criminal acts..” [Emphasis added].

The Society supports the Public Health Directorate of the Ministry of Health’s conclusion when it stated in its written submission of 18 March 2007 on the unrevised book, that it should be classified as objectionable under s3 of the FVPC Act, because: if made available to the public, it would be of “interest to and read by people at risk of suicide as well as those contemplating euthanasia. In addition, we note that the book itself confuses these two subjects by the use of the term ‘suicide’ throughout.”

The Chief Censor’s Office in its latest decision on the new revised edition (OFLC Decision No. 800267) notes:

“The issues raised [by the Ministry in 2007 regarding the unrevised book, noted above] remain pertinent to the publication now under consideration.” [Emphasis added]

The Society contends that the New Revised International Edition should be banned for the same reasons raised by the Ministry (quoted from above) with respect to the earlier unrevised version. The removal by the author of sections of the earlier book that had been identified as problematic by the Chief Censor’s Office, have not significantly changed the overall impact and dominant effect of the publication as a whole.

The Society shares the serious concerns of the Ministry of Health, that in the confusion created by the unrevised book over the concept of suicide and euthanasia, young New Zealanders will be drawn to it to examine ‘exit strategies’ – referred to as “suicide” methods, to address their personal problems of depression etc. The Society contends that these concerns apply equally to the new edition.

Despite the publisher’s warning note in the revised book that it is not intended for readers suffering depression etc., its wide availability through New Zealand bookshops and via the internet, and the fact that it is intended to be resource guide and workshop manual at Exit meetings to be held throughout the country; will ensure that it does in fact fall into the hands of many vulnerable young people aged 18 -24 years of age. It is naïve to suggest that at-risk youth in these categories have the maturity and level of discernment needed to be able to avoid being drawn into the culture of death, self-harm and quick-fix ‘solutions’ offered by the exit strategies espoused in The Peaceful Pill Handbook (revised). Many youths in this age group already regularly fall foul of the law due to irresponsible, mindless, and anti-social behaviour.

The OFLC states in its classification decision on the revised book with reference to s 3(4)(a) of the Act: “the dominant effect of the publication as a whole” …”upon readers for whom it is intended, ill and elderly who are considering suicide” is to empower them to commit suicide, and comfort and reassure them over the period leading up to the point that they can implement this horrendous exit strategy (suicide) by using meticulously planned strategies outlined in the book. The book is also designed to provide solace and relief to the consciences of those who engage in the crime of assisting others to commit suicide, either by flouting the law by accessing, importing or manufacturing banned drugs to be used in suicide strategies, or assisting in other ways. The cold, callous tone of much of the descriptive content on suicide methodologies is “chilling” as critics have noted.

The Society contends that while it is pertinent for censors to take into consideration the readers for whom the book may have been intended, as the OFLC decision has done, they must not fail to seriously consider the question of the protection of the wider “public good” from injury. The OFLC report has unfortunately failed to address properly the “dominant effect of the publication as a whole” upon those readers who access the book who do not fit into the category of those for which the book was not intended – those who are not elderly, sickly or suffering age-related debilitations and trauma.

The revised edition of the Peaceful Pill Handbook does pose a very real danger to many young teenagers and young adults (18-to 20 years of age) contemplating suicide and this has been acknowledged in the submissions to the OFLC by the Ministry of Health on the unrevised book, criticisms which we have noted earlier, the OFLC acknowledges “remain pertinent” to the revised new edition of the book.

The Ministry wrote: “Studies of the impact of Final Exit, another book promoted by Dr Nitschke, advocating suicide for those who are terminally ill [and which the Indecent Publications Tribunal2 classified as "not indecent" in 1992], found a consistent association suggesting that the book had influenced the choice of suicide method in a number of cases.” Furthermore, they believed that the book’s rating of suicide methods by ‘reliability’ and ‘peacefulness’ would have the potential to increase fatal attempts in some population groups, such as women, who have previously been less likely to use more lethal methods of suicide due to perceived violence or pain associated with them.”

The new edition of the Peaceful Pill Handbook continues to categorise suicide methods in a similar fashion to its earlier version, now banned, and that found in Final Exit, providing step-by-step meticulously detailed instructions on how to effectively commit suicide. The Ministry of Health’s submission cites research into the association between portrayal of suicide in the media and increases in suicides using these methods. This was acknowledged by the Associate Minister of Health, Hon. Jim Anderton in a press release dated 22 November 2007. In releasing the shocking statistics for New Zealand suicide rates at the 5th National Suicide Prevention Symposium in Wellington, he stated:

“Any suicide remains a serious concern and is a tragedy for family and friends. In 2005, 502 people died by suicide. Those who had particularly high rates were those aged between 15 and 44, along with Mâori and those living in the most deprived areas of New Zealand. Men also had higher rates than women – for every three male suicides there was one female suicide’…. NB: There is evidence that some types of media coverage of suicide can increase suicide rates.”3 [Emphasis added]

The risk of imitation by young persons and young adults (18 -24) of the self-harm outlined in the revised Peaceful Pill book, particularly those less complicated methods of suicide such as the use of an exit-bag, is “significant” as the Classification Office acknowledges in its recent 8 May decision.

The rate of suicides among New Zealand young people is shocking.

In 2005 global suicide rates among adolescents in the 15-19 age group, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) Mortality Database, were published and the results examined (World Psychiatry. 2005 June; 4(2): 114-120). Data for this age group were available from 90 countries (in some cases areas) out of the 130 WHO member states.

Suicide numbers and rates per 100,000 young persons aged 15-19 in the 63 countries (areas) for which data are available for the year 1995 put New Zealand at the second highest position.4 It was second highest for rates in both males and for males and females combined.

Suicide numbers and rates per 100,000 young persons aged 15-19 in 90 countries (areas), according to the WHO Mortality Database, February 2004 (latest available data for each country or area), put New Zealand at number six for combined male and female rates. There were only five countries with rates higher than New Zealand’s rate: Sri Lanka (highest), followed by Lithuania, Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, and Luxenboug.5

Youth (15 to 24 years-old) suicide is a tragic outcome – the loss of young lives to families, schools, communities and the wider society. Suicide matters not only for the consequences of the act itself but because of the anguish, depression, hopelessness and other negative experiences associated with suicide that occur amongst New Zealand youth contemplating, or at-risk of, suicide.

Research indicates that suicide is associated with depression, hopelessness, adjustment difficulty and severe stresses or life crises, including relationship break-ups. Bullying and intimidation in the peer group have been implicated in youth suicide.6

Young people experience suicide and self-inflicted mortality rates well in excess of those in the rest of the population. In 1996 there were 144 deaths of young people aged 15 to 24 years that were attributed to suicide. This represented 26.6 percent of total suicide deaths, while 15 to 24-year-olds made up only 15.6 percent of the total population.

Suicide and self-inflicted injury is much more common among young men than among young women. In 1996 males aged 20 to 24 years experienced the highest suicide mortality rate of any age group. At 49.7 deaths per 100,000 the rate for this group was more than four times greater than the rate of 12.4 per 100,000 recorded for females the same age. Males aged 15 to 19 years experienced the second highest mortality rate from suicide in 1996, with a rate nearly twice that of their female counterparts (29.2 per 100,000 compared with 16.2 per 100,000.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/analytical-reports/young-new-zealander/suicide-rate.htm

For Suicide Facts: 2005-2006 data is available on the Ministry of Health’s website: http://www.moh.govt.nz

The Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa-New Zealand sums up the crisis in this country on its current website, as follows:

• Suicide is second only to car accidents as the main cause of death among young people (aged 15-24).
• On average two young people die every week as a result of suicide.
• Each week, a further 26 intentionally harm themselves.
• NZ has the highest suicide rate amongst OECD countries for females aged 15-24
• Over the last 20 years the youth suicide rate has increased 7

It is not as though authorities in New Zealand have not known about the problem of youth suicide. News of this social disaster has been widely reported overseas. For example, on 15 July 1995 The New York Times carried an article by Philip Shenon, headlined “New Zealand Seeks Causes of Suicides by Young.” It stated:

“For every 100,000 New Zealanders aged 15 to 19, about 16 kill themselves every year – a rate 40 percent higher than the United States, 50 percent higher than Australia and four times that of Japan, For New Zealanders ages 15 to 24, suicide is the second most frequent cause of death, after motor vehicle crashes.

“And the suicide rate may actually be much higher, since many car crashes here involving teen-agers are believed to be suicides, with the drivers intentionally taking their cars over cliffs or crashing them into alls.

“On one neighbourhood of Auckland, New Zealand’s largest city, eight teen-agrs have killed themselves so far this year.

“Many New Zealanders suggest that the suicide figures show something has gone terribly wrong in the way they raise their children.”

A two-day symposium was held at the Wellington School of Medicine on 21 and 22 November 2007, organised by Suicide Prevention Information New Zealand (SPINZ), to encourage individuals, communities, and organisations to work collaboratively to enhance suicide prevention efforts in New Zealand. The latest New Zealand suicide facts available from the Ministry of Health for 2005-2006 were released on Thursday 22 November by Associate Minister of Health, the Hon Jim Anderton, at the fifth National Suicide Prevention Symposium in Wellington. Judi Clements, Chief Executive of the Mental Health Foundation, responded to the findings saying:

“This data means that we still need to be vigilant about access to the means of suicide as well as reaching those who may be at risk of because of depression and other known risk factors.”8 [Emphasis added]

The Society challenges officials in the Department of Internal Affairs considering the contents of The Peaceful Pill Handbook (New Revised International Edition) to carefully consider what Ms Clements has stated.

Now that it has been rated R18, Dr Nitschke’s book will be available to New Zealanders through numerous retail bookshops, the Exit International website and other sources, providing them with easy access to “the means of suicide”, details on how to assist suicide etc. the very problems we seek to address – the staggeringly high youth suicide rates in New Zealand – will be made much worse. There is a widespread consensus among suicide prevention agency professionals and mental health experts that the dissemination of detailed information about how to commit suicide, via the media etc, leads to greater numbers of suicides, and those methods of suicides highlighted are more frequently employed.

Suicide Prevention Information New Zealand (SPINZ), a service of the Mental Health Foundation that aims to assist communities and services throughout New Zealand to prevent suicide by providing them with best practice Information. It contributed to the Ministry of Health submission to the OFLC on the unrevised version of he Peaceful Pill, calling for it to be banned. SPCS believes it has the full support of such agencies in calling for the revised book to be banned. There is a prima facie case for the banning of this book, as its content is “objectionable” – being “injurious to the public good.”

2. “Objectionable” under s 3(3)(i) and 3(4) of the Act.

Introduction

Section 3(3) of the Act leading into 3(a)(i) states… “In determining, for the purposes of this Act, whether or not any publication … is objectionable …. particular weight shall be given to the extent and degree to which, and the manner in which, the publication – (a) describes, depicts, or otherwise deals with – (i) “…the infliction of serious physical harm“.

Section 3(3)(d) identifies a publication as being potentially “objectionable” if it “promotes or encourages criminal acts ….”

S. 179 of the Crimes Act 1961 makes a person liable to 14 years imprisonment if that person “incites, counsels, or procures any person to commit suicide, if that person commits or attempts suicide in consequence thereof; or aids or abets any person in the commission of suicide.”

S. 4 of the FVPC Act lists factors that must be taken account of when considering whether or not a publication should to be ruled “objectionable”, once activities or acts listed in s.3(3) have been identified as problematic, having noted the extent, degree and manner of the etc. Pertinent to the classification of revised Peaceful Pill Handbook is s. 3(4)(a) “the dominant effect of the publication as a whole”, (c) “the character of the publication, including any merit, value…” (e) “the purpose for which the publication is intended or likely use of the publication”.

Discussion

S. 3(3)(i) Suicide is obviously the most extreme form of serious physical harm one can commit or cause others to commit. A book that purports to advance a case for euthanasia, but as the Ministry of Health submits, uses the term ‘suicide’ throughout, is totally dishonest. The deliberate conflation of these terms in the book by the authors has outraged those dealing with suicide-prevention, who have had input into the Ministry of Health’s submission to the OFLC dated 18 March 2007.

The revised Peaceful Pill Handbook is a HANDBOOK (how-to-do or DIY) for methods of committing suicide and assisting those who wish to do so. The very purpose of the book is to discuss the various options, ‘pros and cons’ of ways in which to commit suicide leaving the reader with the informed view as to the most appropriate method given their particular circumstances. The author’s intentions in writing the book have been clearly stated in news media statements by Dr Nitschke. He says it is intended to be instrumental in providing advice on ways and means (DIY) to people who are considering or who may wish to consider the means of committing suicide.

The advice contained in the book – meticulously detailed step-by-step instructions – and necessary intention of those giving advice – coupled with the commission or attempted commission of suicide “in consequence thereof“; would be sufficient to establish criminal liability on the part of its authors. It would not be a defense for the authors’ publisher or the authors facing a criminal charge of inciting suicide, to depend on the intent of the person committing the suicide. Distributors or others associated with the delivery of the book to the end user could be criminally liable if they have the necessary intent.

It is absurd and dishonest of defenders of the book to claim that the original book was intended merely as a reference work containing relevant information on suicide issues and did not seek to influence readers’ choices. Counsel for the authors in a submission to the OFLC dated 13 March 2006, state:

“By redaction the book rather than publishing an abridged edition, and by allowing the headlines to remain, Dr Nitschke has allowed the reader to obtain a sense of the subject mater of the original text, as well as the redacted material, without actually having access to that material and without compromising the book’s message.” [Emphasis added].

And what is the book’s message?

The Product description of Amazon.com states:

“The Peaceful Pill Handbook draws on the latest research on end of life choices, to bring the reader a range of practical and useful strategies. By applying Exit’s unique Reliability and Peacefulness Test; readers can compare methods including Nembutal from Mexico, the use of Helium, the Dignitas service of Switzerland, prescription drugs and the DIY Peaceful Pill. This new edition also contains full colour photos of Mexican drug names and the latest labelling.” [Emphasis added]9

The “practical and useful strategies” Dr Nitschke advocates include escorting people to places overseas where banned drugs can be obtained and encouraging them to import them for use in “exit strategies” (suicide). He regularly encourages and incites people to break the law. He caused controversy in New Zealand when he announced plans to accompany eight New Zealanders to Mexico and help them purchase the potentially life-ending drug Nembutal.10

The New Zealand Medical Council has in the past complained to the health ministry about Dr Nitschke visiting and holding workshops in New Zealand and voiced concerns prior to his recent visit here to promote his book..

Dr Nitschke boasts that on the basis of information he has supplied to people through his book and seminars, that about 100 Australians made the Nembutal trek to Mexico last year and another 20 have done so this year. And this high number is in spite of the book being banned in Australia! He said most of those people were in their 70s and 80s, not suffering from a terminal or disabling disease but simply preparing for the future. He said:

“In our workshops, we encourage people to make the trip while they’re still healthy … otherwise, if they get sick and rely on their families to smuggle in the drug, they’re putting their wives or children at risk of being charged with assisted suicide.”11 [Emphasis added].

Having obtained an R18 classification for the Revised Peaceful Pill in New Zealand, Dr Nitschke’s told the media he is “thrilled”. His strategy is very clear. He has made this revised version available on the internet for download to circumvent Australian censorship laws and make a mockery of the censor’s ruling in New Zealand. It remains an offence under the Act for anyone in New Zealand to distribute age-restricted material to those under age.

In an article by John Elder published in The Age and entitled “Illegal book heads through internet gateway” the motivation of Dr Nitschke to circumvent the law and incite people to commit criminal acts is made clear.

“THE outlawed euthanasia manual The Peaceful Pill Handbook will soon be available as a downloadable document from the internet via Google Books. The deal with Google Books was made in the US last week by the book’s author and euthanasia campaigner Dr Philip Nitschke, who said the download version, illegal under Australian law, would cost about US$30 ($A37)….

“The download version will be illegal but people will take that risk because they feel they won’t be tracked down,” said Dr Nitschke. “We’ve heard there has been some trouble with buying it on Amazon … from people not receiving books.”12

The question of an author’s or publisher’s supposed good intention in relation to a publication is not sufficient to override facts that lead to it being deemed “objectionable”. If the “dominant effect of the publication as a whole” is “injurious to the public good”, it can be clasified “objectionable” under ss.3(3) and 3(4). In this case the Society contends that there is a prima facie case that an R18 age restriction is unsufficient to prevent injury to the public good. The Society wants the book banned.

According to the OFLC decision dated 8 May 2008, counsel for the authors:

“… note that it is the opinion of the author [Dr Nitschke] that voluntary euthanasia as it is described in the book, does not constitute “serious harm“. The book is targeted at the elderly and the terminally ill “investigating end-of-life opinions” and that compared with the physical harm brought about by such terminal illness, “voluntary eithanasia cannot be viewed as serious physical harm to rhose individuals who make up the book’s target market”.

However, commiting suicide does constitute “serious harm” – is is unquestionably the most extreme form of self-harm. The options outlined by Dr Nitschke are set out as suicide options throughout his book. Clearly the author’s intention is, as the Senior Police Legal Advisor submitted, was to be instrumental in persuading readers that committing suicide was a viable option and aiding and abeting such activity, as exemplified by the author’s own endeavours, was an honourable service to others.

It is very telling that Counsel for the book’s authors, in their submission to the OFLC, sought “an unrestrictd classification for the book”. This convinces the Society that sadly, Dr Nitcsche has no real understanding of the real potential his book has to cause serious injury and harm to the public good. Why would any reasonable person with a compasionate concern for those who run a very high risk of being adversely impacted by this book – leading them to commit suicide – ever want an unrestricted classification for such a book? Is there a commercial motive here?

3. Professional agencies and senior qualified experts working in the field of youth suicide prevention.

On 7 February 2008, the Chief Censor instructed the Comptroller of Customs to notify interested parties of their right to make a submission on the revised Peaceful Pill Handbook within 14 working days (by 28 February). Submissions were received on the original book (unrevised), according to the OFLC report, from Senior Police Legal Advisor Inspector Alistair Murray, The Voluntary Euthanasia Society of New Zealand, Right to Life New Zealand Inc,. Counsel for the book’s authors, Kensington Swan, Mr Peter Brown MP and the Public Health Directorate of the Ministry of Health.

According to the OFLC decision, submissions on the revised book were only received from Right To Life New Zealand Inc, and Kensington Swan, counsel for the importer of the publication.

In their submission to the OFLC, counsel for the authors list the sections that have been redacted from the earlier banned book and note that Dr Nitschke claims that all sections “relating to criminal activity, including the undetectability ratings accorded to each method in the Exit RP text, have been redacted”.

Even if such redactions have all been made, the “dominant effect of the [revised book] as a whole” on vulnerable youth and especially those contemplating self-harm (suicide). remains the same as for the earlier banned version. The risk of imitation by young persons of the self-harm methods meticulously explained in the revised version, remains “significant”, as the OFLC report of 8 May 2008 notes, “particularly those less complicated methods of suicide such as the use of an exit-bag.”

4. The public interest.

Parliament, for very good reasons, adopted into the Act a mechanism by which concerned citizens and others could seek a review of a classification decision issued by the Chief Censor’s Office. That mechanism is found, in part, in s. 47(2)(e) of the Act.

The New Revised International Edition of Dr Nitschke’s book, with its redactions, blacked out with headings retained, appears to be designed to titillate and incite the curious minds of those who are driven by a fascination for suicide – one of the few remaining so-called “taboo” topics – and an abhorence of any form of censorship. The format chosen, highlighting deleted passages is an arrogant afront to the censorship laws in New Zealand. It will ignite the fury of those vehemently opposed to all forms of censorship and spawn a plethora of internet blog postings etc. purporting to, or actually disclosing the sections of the book that have been redacted. Dr Nitscke will be thrilled with such an outcome as it will put his book once again into the media spotlight and boost worldwide sales. The unrevised banned version of the book will become hot property and market forces will fuel an ever increasing perverse interest in those passages in the revised book that have been blacked out. These sections undoubtdly will soon be available for internet download, making a mockery of the classification and censorship laws.

It is in the public interest for this conroversial book, which has an immense potential for causing untold injury to the public good, to be rexamined for classification by the nine member Film and Literature Board of Review. The book has no merit whatsoever.

The Society is not opposed to healthy, robust and informed debate on the subject of euthanasis but it, like all those agencies involved in suicide-prevention, wants this book reclassified by a Board that can ensure significant input in relation to the revised publication under consideration. Interested parties were only givemn 14 working days to make submissions on a book which they had never had the opportunity to view, let alone have time to import from a dubious website that has regularly flouted the law.

1. See Classification Review Board Media Release dated 24 February 2007     http://www.classification.gov.au/resource.html?resource=952&filename=952.pdf

2. IPT 92-75, 31 July 1992

3. http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/suicide+statistics+released

4.  http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi? artid=1414751&rendertype=table&id=T2

5. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1414751&rendertype=table&id=T1

6. http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/indicators/education_and_learning_outcomes/labour_market_and_social_outcomes/youth_suicide

7.  http://www.presbyterian.org.nz/4602.0.html

8.  Press release from Mental Health Foundation  http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/GE0711/S00114.htm

9.  http://www.amazon.com/Peaceful-Pill-Handbook-Revised-International/dp/0978878825

10. NZ offered Mexican Suicide Drug Trip. The Age (2007-02-06).

11. http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/illegal-book-heads-through-internet-  gateway/2007/03/31/1174761817937.html

12. http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/illegal-book-heads-through-internet-gateway/2007/03/31/1174761817937.html

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:

Additional Comments Relevant to Society’s Proposed Lower Classification of the DVD End of the Spear and Formal Application for Leave.

5 February 2008

Further to the information submitted earlier by fax by the Society to the Secretary of Internal Affairs re the Application for Leave, please add the following:

It has come the attention of the Society today that the Film and Video Labelling Body has now approved a new classification of the film End of the Spear (originally classified on 20/12/07 as R16 by the FVLB by [incorrectly] cross-classifying it with the American DVD version) following a submission for a revised classification from the film’s distributor Life Resources Ltd.

The distributor sent an email to the Society today stating:

“Bill Hood has passed the film with a rating of M Medium Level Violence….”
Lime Light Motion Picture Company
1st Floor 320 Manchester Street
Christchurch (Life Resources Building)
8142 New Zealand

The Society contends that this reclassification should be taken into account by the Secretary in his decision on granting leave to the Society in its application relating to the DVD version classified by the OFLC as R16 (OFLC Ref No. 702607).

A number of films in the Xena Warrior Princess series contain lengthy depictions of “medium level violence” involving the deaths of combatants and injuries and mutilation inflicted on others. These publications have been classified unrestricted – M – recommended for mature audiences 16 years of age and over, by the Film and Video Labelling Body (FVLB). They have not been referred by the FVLB to the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) for classification because nothing in the film has been considered injurious to the public good. The FVLB has given these films description notes: “Contains medium level violence”. These films are all infested with relentless violence, for the purpose of entertainment.

The Console Game Xena Warrior Princess was referred to the OFLC by the FVLB and was classified “Unrestricted: Suitable for mature audiences 16 years of age and over”, with the description note: “Contains violence” (OFLC Decision 9902349). Young people playing this game are exposed to lengthy repetitive sessions of “violence” involving combatants weilding weapons and inflicting grievous bodily harm.

The film Once Were Warriors was classified RP15 by the OFLC which allows any child under 15 years of age to view the film if accompanied by an adult or guardian. The brutal violence and cruelty depicted is recognised as relentless, of high impact and accompanied by vulgar and offensive language. The censor’s description states: “Contains violence”.

The Society (SPCS) contends that, in the light of the above classifications (many others could be cited) to restrict the DVD – End of the Spear – to those persons 16 years of age and over, is an unjustifiably harsh classification that is an assault on the principle of freedom of expression embodied in the Bill of Rights Act.

The harsh classification involves a failure by the OFLC to properly apply Section 3 of the Films, Videos and Publications Classificaton Act 1993. The Society agrees with the OFLC that the overwlelming impact of the film comes from its sensitive depiction of an epic story that highlights the themes of Christian faith, forgiveness, reconciliaton and Christian love. The latter is motivated by the missionaries’ passion to see a tribe on the verge of extinction – through violence – find the truth of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ – which brings peace as one of its many fruits. The depiction of inter-tribal fighting and the murder of the missionaries, is integral to the telling of the true story and none of its presentation is gratuitous.

Kevin Costner’s 1990 epic film Dancing With Wolves which received a number of Oscar nominations, was classified “M” (unrestricted) – suitable for those 16 years of age and over -  by the Film and Video Labelling Body, with the description: “Contains Violence”. This film contains many graphic scenes involving the slaughter of Indians by whitemen, graphic scenes of the mass slaughter of buffaloes and other animals, cruel and brutal slayings of white men by Indians including grapic scenes of scalping and other atrocities. One scene involving mass carnage leaves the river red with blood and human corpses.

If such a film as Dancing With Wolves, of great historical significance, has been made available to NZ young people for cinema viewing and home viewing (DVD and video), then it is very hard to contemplate how the Chief Censor, Bill Hastings, his deputy Nicola McCully, a Classification Officer and a Senior Classification Officer, could possibly have reached the view that the film End of the Spear could possible warrant a R16 classification.

The CO and SCO signed their “actions” off, involving the classification process of this film, on 9/11/07. The SCO affirmed the recommendation on 12/11/07. The CO prepared the documents on 12/11/07 and the SCO/DCC/CC classified and signed the documents on 13/11/07. The DVD version of the film – End of The Spear – was registered as classified on 14/11/07.

The Society believes that many Christian parents and guardians as well as others, familiar with the story behind the film, would be keen to have their children aged 13-15 view the film. Parents are the best persons to assess whether of not their childrren are mature enough to view such a film which has received classifications in the US and Australia allowing those younger that 16 years to view it.

Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc.