Senate Leader and Attorney- General, A.J. Nicholson, yesterday rejected the notion that legislation recently passed in Parliament treaded on the constitutional rights to freedom of speech and should therefore, be revisited.

The Attorney-General was criticising an editorial in The Gleaner yesterday which stated that Governor-General Professor Kenneth Hall should not assent to the amendment to the Registration of Business Names Act, which was passed in the Upper House last week.

The Gleaner had stated its concern with Section 16(a) of the legislation which states that "a firm which, or an individual or trader who, is not registered in accordance with the provisions in this act shall not issue any advertisement in relation to the business of that firm, individual or trader."

In his remarks, Senator Nicholson said the newspaper's advice to the Governor-General was misconceived.

Frustrated

He contended that, if persons are allowed to advertise businesses, using names other than their own without registration, the "purpose of the act could be frustrated."

Making reference to The Gleaner's concern that the constitution's protection of freedom of speech might be infringed, Mr. Nicholson denied there was any such risk.

"The Constitution recognises the right to freedom of speech, which may include the right to advertise one's business, but it indicates that that right is subject to laws which protect the rights of other persons. The Registration of Business Names Act is clearly one such law," he emphasised.

In its editorial, The Gleaner stated that the preclusion of advertising by a firm or a trader whose name is not properly registered, "in the absence of proof that its advertising poses grave danger to the public, does not meet our public interest test."

It further cautioned that freedom of speech should not be trifled with, pointing out that free speech and its attendant right to hold and exchange ideas are the foundation of democracy.

Yesterday Anthony Johnson, Leader of Opposition Business in the Senate, demanded clarification on Section 16(a) of the Act.

He said he wanted to know how an individual who was not registered in accordance with the stipulated provision in the Bill could advertise in future.

According to Senator Johnson, the problem was not with the firm or trader but the individual.

Senator Nicholson responded that an individual who does not own a firm, but is doing business using his name, may advertise.

However, Senator Johnson insisted that the wording of the bill was at variance with its intent.