Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/540322
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 12 JULY 2015 12 News RAPHAEL VASSALLO IT was only six years ago that a sombre procession of around 100 black-clad protesters marched through Valletta carrying a make- shift coffin labelled 'Art is Dead'. Organised by the 'Front Against Censorship', this mock funeral cor- tege had been sparked mainly (but not uniquely) by the criminal pros- ecution of an author and magazine editor over publication of an 'ob- scene' short story earlier that year. Novelist Alex Vella Gera faced a possible six months imprison- ment for writing the offending story (Li Tkisser Sewwi), alongside Mark Camilleri for publishing it in a magazine distributed for free on the University campus. Nor was this the only case in which literary or artistic expres- sion was somehow suppressed or restricted on grounds of public decency. Some months earlier, lo- cal theatre company Unifaun's at- tempts to stage an Andrew Nielsen play (Stitching) were thwarted by the Stage and Film Classification Board, resulting in a Constitutional case that the producers of Stitching were to go on to lose. Elsewhere there was mounting evidence that this censorial ap- proach to art was on the increase in 2009. Speaking at the 'funeral' protest, the Front Against Censor- ship's Ingram Bondin warned of an escalation in cases where artists and authors could be "criminalised and potentially sent to jail just be- cause their art might be unpalat- able to certain individuals". "While last year there were at least six attempted cases of censor- ship, in the first seven months of this year there were at least eight," he pointed out. But even as Bondin spoke from the podium, the same 1975 law that formed the basis of the Li Tkisser Sewwi prosecution was in the proc- ess of being revised… to radically increase the penalties for crimes against 'public morality'. The pendulum swings From this perspective, the turna- round since that time has been little short of extraordinary. For starters, the case against Vella Gera and Camilleri did not go accord- ing to the approved script. The law courts, at both first instance and appeals stage, upheld the defence's argument that freedom of expres- sion was enshrined in the Univer- sal Human Rights Charter. Mean- while, events in the background (even if technically unrelated) radi- cally altered the political landscape that had previously underpinned the State's entire attitude to issues of free speech. The 2011 divorce referendum il- lustrated that the so-called 'tradi- tional' views of morality were no longer widely agreed upon in the country. And with a hotly con- tested election in the offing, politi- cal parties began moderating their own positions to adjust to the new terrain. In 2012, Tourism Minister Mario de Marco (also responsible for art and culture) announced a legal re- form which effectively abolished the Stage and Film Classification Board: introducing instead a sys- tem of self-classification, based on the model used in the UK and elsewhere. This was not enough to overturn the ban on Stitching – upheld by the Constitutional case – but it did remove the legal infrastructure which made the ban possible. The following year, the Labour Party would convincingly win the election, in (admittedly small) part on the promise of a more 'progres- sive' approach to such matters. And this week, Justice Minister Owen Bonnici announced the frui- tion of part of that promise, in the form of a raft of legal amendments that seem aimed at removing all (or most) remaining vestiges of the previous State censorship ma- chine. Among the more relevant chang- es are the removal of criminal sanc- tions for "vilification of the Roman Catholic religion, and other cults tolerated at law": an offence that previously entailed imprisonment of up to six months. This law had been cited on numerous occasions in recent years, and accounts for at least two of the eight 2009 prosecu- tions mentioned by Bondin at that Valletta protest. Meanwhile, the same 1975 ob- scenity laws invoked against Vella Gera and Camilleri, which generi- cally outlawed any expression that 'unduly emphasised sex, crime, horror, cruelty and violence', will also be removed. In its place there will be a new law that, unlike its predecessor, provides a legal defini- tion of 'pornography': namely, "an- ything capable of being displayed [that exhibits] live and actual sexual activity involving the sexual organs made solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal." Under the new legislation, only "extreme pornography" will re- main subject to criminal sanction – defined as "an act which threatens a person's life, an act which results in a person's severe injury, rape or a non-consensual sexual activity, sexual activity involving a human corpse, and any act involving a per- son and an animal." Conversely, this also means that 'mainstream' pornography – hith- erto illegal in Malta – will now be decriminalised… and perhaps un- surprisingly, it is this aspect of the legislative reform that has to date attracted most media attention. The good, the bad and the ugly In Bonnici's words, the reform aims to challenge existing percep- tions that the government's role is to safeguard public morality. "The State cannot play moral custodian," he told journalists when launch- ing the bill last Thursday. "Adults should not be told what they can and cannot watch.[…] We need to recognise that morality changes over time – it is not a static thing, and legislation needs to acknowl- edge this." Similar sentiments were echoed by Mario de Marco: architect of the initial censorship reform, and now shadow justice minister. "Laws are generally meant to re- flect society and its realities," he said in comments to this newspa- per. "The good, the bad and the ugly. Whilst I have not yet had the occasion to read through the pro- posed legislative amendments, and ultimately the devil is in the de- tail, the thrust seems to be in the direction of a state of natural pro- gression towards today's realities. Not all realities may be positive, and some beauty spots may have become warts. But it is better to recognise and face up to these re- alities, than to ignore." It is a direction the Opposition seems to endorse, too. "Freedom of expression is undoubtedly one of the most important fundamen- tal human rights," de Marco adds. "Only a few months ago we were asserting "je suis Charlie" in soli- darity with the slain members of the Charlie Hebdo journalistic team, and in affirmation that free- dom of expression – even if pro- vocative – is the ultimate reflection and scale by which to gauge true democracy." It remains to be seen, however, what impact the legislative changes will have once enacted. Reactions to the proposals have so far been mixed: though broadly welcomed by those directly involved in the creative arts, public response has also been characterised by fears of a pendulum swing in the opposite direction… notably in connection with the prospect of a future Malta dotted with sex shops. A 'Copernican revolution' Activists like Ingram Bondin ar- gue that such reactions tend to miss the point of what the reform The last nail in the censorship coffin? Activists have broadly welcomed a legal reform to remove the last vestiges of State censorship in Malta, but doubts linger regarding how effective the measures will prove Reactions to the proposals have so far been mixed: though broadly welcomed by those directly involved in the creative arts, public response has also been characterised by fears of a pendulum swing in the opposite direction Front Kontra c-Censura organise an anti-censorship protest back in 2010