Banning of 'Stitching' justified - Court
Scottish writer Anthony Neilson, author of Stitching.
The Civil Court has found that the Film and Stage Classification Board did not violate freedom of expression when it banned the play Stitching last year.
The play, penned by Scottish writer Anthony Neilson, addresses such themes as death and abortion.
The case was instituted by Adrian Buckle, Christopher Gatt, Maria Pia Zammit, Mikhail Basmadjian and Unifaun Theatre Productions Ltd against Teresa Friggieri, the prime minister, the Police commissioner and the Attorney General.
The producers had pleaded that the banning of the play, in January last year, violated their fundamental right of freedom of expression.
They also pointed out that the script of the play was freely available in Malta and the play had been staged in many other European countries.
They called for the classification of 'banned' to be replaced by another classification which would enable the play to be staged.
The court in an 115-page judgement said it had been asked to decide whether the decision by the board to stop the staging of the play had violated freedom of expression.
It had no hesitation in saying that the decision of the board was correct and according to law.
The court said the board was obliged to follow the law. There as nothing unreasonable in the board having viewed the play as being offensive to the culture of this country in its broadest sense.
It was not proper, even in a democratic and pluralistic society as is Malta's, for the lows of human dignity to be exalted even on the pretext of showing how a couple could survive a storm.
One could not make extensive use of language which was vulgar, obscene and blasphemous and which exalted perversion and undermined the right to life. Neither could one undermine the dignity of women including the victims of the holocaust, reduce women to a simple object of sexual gratification, and ridicule the family.
A civil, democratic, and tolerant society could not allow its values to be turned upside down simply because there was freedom of expression.
The court said the board was right to view the play as exalting perversion as if it was acceptable behaviour. Bestiality, the stitching up of a vagina as an act of sexual pleasure and having a woman eat somebody else's excrement, rape and infanticide were unacceptable, even in a democratic society.
Furthermore, the fact that a person was allowed to blaspheme in public, even on stage, went against the law.
The court therefore found that there had been no violation of fundamental human rights as enshrined in the Constiuttion and the European Convention of Human Rights when the play was banned.
The court was presided by Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
68 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
charles caruana
Jun 30th 2010, 23:16
con./
‘If Art does not challenge…’ again more clichéd waffle. What Art pray? The one that would stage ‘toddlers being taught how to sodomize chickens whilst balancing plates on their index fingers...’ as Mr Edward Farrugia elegantly put it? Equating Stitching with Horace, Boccaccio and Picasso says more about the ‘depraved’ quality of your aesthetic taste than that of Stitching itself. No need to burn such stuff; ridicule and time would do the work.
And yes , ‘that parochial temple worship in’ happens to be a Christian civilization that preceded, shaped, and will outlast your parochial Europe, whether you like it or not. Unstable? It will be there when all that’s left of you will be a fading scrabble on a moss grown tombstone.
m.portelli
Jul 1st 2010, 19:56
"Only a parochial mind locked in the ‘box’ of the present finds it difficult to understand that moral decadence and spiritual bankruptcy preceded and paved the way for those regimes "
Really,these regimes were hailed loudly by some very prominent Christians, Bishops , Archbishops and Cardinals, some even received Birthday greetings from the Pope none the less. There is enough irrefutable pictorial evidence for that!. I am sure such an avid history scholar as yourself need not be told the 'joys' of 'nationalism' I also doubt very much this is Christianity's finest moment!! And you would have us shut up and not question! The true moral bankruptcy of those who claim to be arbiters of morality is sadly surfacing for all to see now as hundreds have the courage to speak out. Waffle on sir to your heart's content, your fixation on Christian supremacy however is revealing. Europe was 'shaped' by other great civilizations which fashioned its thinking before Christianity surfaced. Furthermore, please keep in mind that a good number of the expressions we Maltese use to invoke 'God' do not stem from a Christian civilization at all but rather from an Islamic one.
charles caruana
Jun 30th 2010, 23:12
@m portelli
‘Parochial box…hygiene crusades…sanitised minds…little boxes’ You seem to be fixated on clean boxes aren’t you? Is this argument by cliché? It sounds more like more waffle. Only a cultural barbarian suffering from historical dementia could associate crosses with ‘past cultural neo-colonialism’, on a par with a miserably failed European constitution that ‘forgot’ its predominantly Christian heritage. Only a parochial mind locked in the ‘box’ of the present finds it difficult to understand that moral decadence and spiritual bankruptcy preceded and paved the way for those regimes and their depraved claims to ‘moral superiority.’
cont./
Andrew Farrugia
Jun 30th 2010, 21:14
The rampant young followers of Derrida and Foucault seem unable to comprehend the meaning of epistemology and hermeneutics.
m.portelli
Jun 30th 2010, 19:49
@ Charles Caruana
" if that is not the most abject form of conformist Eurocentrism and cultural neo-colonialism, I don’t know what is. "
I see thinking out of the little parochial box is a bit too much for you. Pray do tell what is your fixation with 'crosses' rooted in if not past cultural neo colonialism? Censorship is your sorry answer to economic woes is it?You're very keen on Hygiene crusades, sanitised minds and neat little boxes for everything. Do keep in mind that past alleged 'morally superior' regimes barely 70 years ago took the same sorry road to quash what they termed 'depravity ' in Art and much good that did the world. It rather proved how dangerous it is to have one person with the power to control the artistic expression of others. If Art does not challenge, fossilised parochialism certainly won't. Re"Only the greatest of artists.. Yawn! I guess Horace, Bocaccio even Picasso's Guernica would be on your to 'burn list' let alone anything challenging that parochial temple you fervently worship at. That unstable is it? Keen to pour pure Maltese honey on your 'waffle' are you?
charles caruana
Jun 30th 2010, 16:37
@Joe Fenech
Mr Fenech, what a mixture of sense and nonsense! You were spot on in saying ‘the arts have become a grey area…open to all sorts of crap and charlatans…the shocking factor the order of the day.’ Well put. But then you had to go and spoil it all by putting ‘Stitching’ on the same level as those literary and musical classics, insulting them and their authors.
Do you really think that banning all censorship will produce great art or improve aesthetic sensibility? Haven’t you noticed the irony that most of the great works of art you mentioned were created under far stricter regimes of censorship? That Dante and Chaucer were sons of your middle-ages? Only the greatest of artists know the necessity of limits and artistic decorum. Only third rate would-be artists and performers seek excessive shock tactics to mask their mediocrity. Stitching fits the latter bill perfectly, that is why it will at most deserve a slight passing reference in some minor footnote within the social history of drama, reminding future generations that some among its first English audiences left the theatre in early or mid-performance, and not simply because of a queasy stomach.
Joe Fenech
Jul 1st 2010, 00:02
charles caruana
I think you must have misread this bit:
There is lots around today, however, the shocking factor is often the order of the day. This applies even more to art (painting/sculpture/video art). What many tend to forget is that the world has given us Caravaggio, Beethoven, Shakespeare... They all shocked, they were all controversial: BUT THERE WAS QUALITY.
The problem though in all this is that one can't really apply censorship. It's up to us to deal with what we watch or don't.
charles caruana
Jun 30th 2010, 15:55
@m.portelli
For someone who seems hell bent on sounding like an enfant terrible you do emerge as a terribly fervent worshipper at the temple of Brussels. ‘Showing us up as the laughing stock of Europe’ indeed! If that is not the most abject form of conformist Eurocentrism and cultural neo-colonialism, I don’t know what is.
You are shocked by the ‘Orwellian nightmare’ of the state vetting what fee paying citizens want to watch, yet you seem not to raise an eyebrow about the EU dictating to said state our monetary policy or economic benchmarks or the European Court of Human Wrongs ruling out crucifixes from our public places? ‘Questioning the status quo’ indeed.
Perhaps you could care to enlighten us on what form a Eurochrome art aesthetic would take, its enshrined ‘decency’ and ‘order’, if any, and whether it would be open enough to challenge its own status quo, if any. You see, anyone can be good at waffle.
g.portelli
Jun 30th 2010, 13:46
@ Andrew Farrugia
I guess words are only mono functional in your very ordered world aren't they? They are only meant to express a preset monochrome lest they challenge some enshrined 'decency' and upset 'order'. Perhaps you could care to enlighten us as to what form form the new 'sanitised ' Maltese Art aesthetic should be taking, the 'Idealisation of Hypocrisy through gaggingly 'sweet' confections and pastiche maybe?
PS.
Perhaps Ms. Friggieri could write a paper on the value of 'sanitised' Art aesthetics and enlighten Europeans too for the matter. Some triumph for the new Cultural Policy!
PPS. Will the State police be vetting lyrics for the Isle of MTV concert too?? I would really really really like to know.
m.portelli
Jun 30th 2010, 13:32
European Malta's finest hour you don't say!! It seems our courts have transformed themselves into the theatre of the absurd hellbent on showing us up as the laughing stock of Europe. If this is setting a precedent of the shape of things to come for the other censorship cases on the list then Malta is indeed becoming a sorry place to live in.
"A civil, democratic, and tolerant society could not allow its values to be turned upside down simply because there was freedom of expression."
A civil democratic and tolerant society should be assertive enough to leave room for the questioning of status quo particularly through the Arts without feeling threatened. Turning the clock back and putting the trappings in place for a less open society is infantile at best. Assuming that fee paying citizens need the state to vet what they want to watch has the makings of an Orwellian nightmare.
Edward Farrugia
Jun 30th 2010, 01:21
Maria Azzopardi...enlighten me. Let's keep this civil shall we?
Andrew Farrugia
Jun 29th 2010, 19:14
Has anyone noticed how some so-called glitterati seem to get turned on by reeling off a series of literary works as if they are showing off their erudition. Reminds me of an article i read no so long ago: "Indoctrination U: The Left's war against academic freedom" by David Horowitz.
Of particular interest is the author's claim that these "new political orthodoxies" have taken over most of our universities and higher seats of learning in order to "deconstruct the nation's identity and (to divide) communities into warring classes, genders and races". He continues to state that for these new high priests of academe, "teaching is not a disinterested intellectual enquiry but a form of political combat". Read carefully the comments in this thread and see if you can spot some of these radicals.
Joe Fenech
Jun 29th 2010, 17:06
Ban Oliver Twist (David Lean's version): child exploitation and theft are bad. Then 'Oompah Pah'...oh my word - that's REALLY evil!
Ban Strauss's Salomé: sex, someone betraying God... Holalaaaaa!
Ban The Beatles - too many drugs there and adherence to a non-Christian religion is a no go... Quo Vadis!!
Ban Ovid's Methamorphosis - too much sex, self-adulation, fighting, treachery... It's all too much!!!!
Joe Fenech
Jun 29th 2010, 16:54
Edward Farrugia:
I must say you do have a point. I think the arts have become a grey area that escapes definition and which is open to all sorts of crap and charlatans.
There is lots around today, however, the shocking factor is often the order of the day. This applies even more to art (painting/sculpture/video art). What many tend to forget is that the world has given us Caravaggio, Beethoven, Shakespeare... They all shocked, they were all controversial: BUT THERE WAS QUALITY.
The problem though in all this is that one can't really apply censorship. It's up to us to deal with what we watch or don't.
Joe Fenech
Jun 29th 2010, 16:39
"It was not proper, even in a democratic and pluralistic society as is Malta's, for the lows of human dignity to be exalted even on the pretext of showing how a couple could survive a storm."
Ban Othello: it's inappropriate to use devious methods in order to overthrow someone
Ban L'Avare: making money your god is inappropriate and not a good way to deal with life
Ban Death Of A Saleman: one should be looking after his family not working hours on end..
Blablablabla.....
MALTA = bigotary, middle-ages, compliance, lack of creativity, sadness, nonsense..
A Zammit
Jun 29th 2010, 14:22
Now, at the very least, I expect the Government/Courts/Board of Censors to stop cable television, Italian channels too, restrict the internet, stop 90 percent of films coming to Malta and 99 percent of theatrical productions. including of course all the Pantos.
This will not happen of course, BUT IT SHOULD. If we are to take this ruling lying down then this is what it means. If I am not allowed to freely choose to watch a play that may reflect some sector of society that I am not a part of and it may, just may, offend my sentiments; then I expect to not be allowed to watch most things. There are so many things on TV, in the cinema, on the 'net that make me sit up and say 'woah' - why am I still allowed to see these things? Where are the Morality Police? Why have they abandoned me? Ban Stitching, Yes! but Ban Everything Else too please. I expect no less.
Maria Azzopardi
Jun 29th 2010, 14:49
hahahahahahhahahahahaha!!
J. Mifsud
Jun 29th 2010, 07:24
'Blaspheming in public went against the law'..............u halluna, mela qatt ma hrigtu mid-dar jew?
Blaspheming is the order of the day in schools, clubs, buses, football grounds, the streets, places of entertainment, places of work, homes..................
And may I ask, how many thousands a year are brought before the Law Courts?
This censorship parody is going a little bit too far. Somestimes I think that we act more Catholic than the Pope.
I am 100% for Classification, but totally against Banning. In this day and age, in this technological world, banning do not make sense.
Education is the secret of all successes.....................
Well, I am at least happy that we won't be losing a good politician to Iran................
Edward Farrugia
Jun 29th 2010, 12:04
Xi hadd jrrid te jew?
Listen..its been banned...GET OVER IT! Break the barriers again..and YES it will be banned AGAIN! My honest opinion..coming from an ignorrant layman...Well I think some people need to rethink what art exactly is or rather what falls under the overused umbrella...because I'm getting the feeling that anything goes....next would be toddlers being taught how to sodomize chickens whilst balancing plates on their index fingers...hehe imagine ah. You arty ppl are all reducing the once highly revered art to a withered, overstretched piece of canvas ...that over time will become meaningless..so..you know what..go ahead..destroy the thing you love most... Tsk tsk tsk
Ramon Mizzi
Jun 30th 2010, 01:31
You couldn't have said it better Mr Mifsud and I will salute you. I had a laugh while reading it, because what you said it very true.
charles caruana
Jun 30th 2010, 17:03
@Mr Edward Farrugia
Mr Farrugia, nicely put! Sometimes ridicule is the best medicine for artistic charlatanism and its defenders.
Joe Zammit
Jun 29th 2010, 05:12
The judge deserves all praise for having gone in depth in his reasoning on the vulgarity, rudeness, insipidness and illogicity of the play 'Stitching'. The play did not succeed to stitch in time, and so it missed nine.
Kenneth Zammit Tabona
Jun 30th 2010, 01:11
Sigh! Yawn!
I really dont know why I bother but here goes...........
Mr Zammit have you read the play?
and btw it is 'insipidity' and 'illogicalness'. When unsure about words just google them.
Alfred Gatt
Jun 28th 2010, 23:34
How pleasant to read that we do have judges who can make the distinction between what is accpetable and what is not in our society. Freedom of expression does not mean freedom to say and do whatever comes into one's mind.
I praise the wisdom of this judge. His judgemnet should be studied in depth, especially by our young lawyers. Hope other judges take his example to defend our public morality.
Maria Azzopardi
Jun 29th 2010, 13:43
Before you go ahead and write something publicly you should do your research, otherwise you risk undermining the point you were trying to make:
" Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship or limitation, or both. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used"
charles caruana
Jun 29th 2010, 16:12
@ Maria Azzopardi
How clever you are at quoting. ‘Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship or limitation, or both.’ Right, so racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic speech should be given free expression, in private and public, without censorship or limitation, or both, right? Now, can you please quote me a researched answer to that question?
jcamilleri
Jun 28th 2010, 23:31
A good move in the right direction. Well done.
Is the promotion of values, including respect to our Courts, sincerely what the critics want; or is it just the gratification of their base instincts?
DR EMMANUEL BEZZINA
Jun 28th 2010, 23:04
Have not the detailed descriptions in this graphic media report ut sic given a thorough view as opposed to a bird`s eye view of what this play is all about ?As there is a possibility of an Appeal before THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT [ a step I humbly highly recommend ],I will not enter into the merits of the First Hall Civil Court [ Constitutional Jurisdiction ]Judgement,even though I have the highest of respect for the presiding Judge.
If an Appeal is made within the 20-day period,I hope that reference is requested to Article 234 of the EU Treaty as it is taking much too long for these Preliminary References to be upheld before the Luxembourg Court of Justice.So STITCHING Plaintiffs must not be disheartened and they must keep legally fighting all the way.I am aware that EXPENSES & FEES are an issue,but WE THE FREE CITIZENS must combat this growing menance of having our God-given INTELLIGENCE thwarted by a CIRCLE in POWER who are defying INDIVIDUAL & BASIC Rights.I watched STITCHING at a rehearsal,as did a number of others well-known faces and minds,and we all agreed at the session I was present that STITCHING was Adult Viewing.
A.Mizzi
Jun 29th 2010, 10:56
DR EMMANUEL BEZZINA,
I think you mean Article 267 TFEU (ex Article 234 TEC); and the court is called the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Joseph Caruana
Jun 28th 2010, 23:00
Interpretazjoni rigida min naha tal-qorti Maltija. Qed nispera li titiehed azjoni min naha tal grupp teatrali biex jappelaw ghal din id-decizjoni.
Steve Borg
Jun 28th 2010, 22:38
Why do I have the sneaky suspicion that those in favour of this judgement have never walked into a theatre? This decision is utterly shameful and humiliating for anybody with any interest in the arts.
A. Slater
Jun 28th 2010, 20:41
So why was the excellent play 'Blasted' by Sarah Kane allowed at St James' ? Blasted features explicit sex, prostitution, eye gouging, rape and cannibalism
Perhaps it's just the blasphemy that's irked Teresa Friggieri?
D.Galea
Jun 28th 2010, 20:30
Now that this sentence was given, Internet companies should be ordered to censor EVERY form of Pornography NOW.
Do not be hypocrites now, enough with two way and two measures in this country.
K. Vella
Jun 28th 2010, 20:27
Air Malta should look into the possibility of operating a weekly flight to Iran.
charles caruana
Jun 28th 2010, 20:11
@Kenneth Zammit Tabona
So what, we know that you are acquainted with the most commonly known classics of literature and opera. Big deal. Are you putting Stitching on the same level as them? Prove it, rather than showing off your ‘culture’.
Of course all those classics deal with human evil, violence and perversion: art should and does deal with all facets, dark and bright,of human existence. The whole point is how real art represents them. One of the most stupid comments already made in this thread is that ‘art imitates life’. Art never merely imitates or reproduces life. If it merely does that it is not art. Any artist worth his salt knows that. All the classics you mentioned have one thing in common that is conspicuously lacking in Stitching – the principle of artistic decorum. This is why Stitching will never attain classic status. Before you wax hysterical about this sentence, think about that.
Jean Azzopardi
Jun 28th 2010, 20:02
While we're at it, let's ban the bible too.
Incest, bestiality, sex, violence, racism....kollha hemm qeghdin!
Fabien Sant Fournier
Jun 29th 2010, 12:49
well said! dont forget rape & genocide!
Andrew Farrugia
Jun 28th 2010, 19:57
True, the psyche of some humans does plumb unfathomable depths, but that is precisely the reason why we should not wallow in it. Methinks there are some nihilists who revel in depravity. On the other hand i feel humbled by the great witness to life provided by a fantastic young woman on another news item. She is surely a beacon of inspiration amid the wasteland in which we live.
Edward Caruana Galizia
Jun 28th 2010, 19:52
What a joke. How are people like Mrs Friggieri capable of being in charge of what plays we are allowed to see, when so much of literature, both old and modern, includes the very themes that exist in Stitching?
There have been plays that have had worse in them, and yet they were allowed to go ahead. It seems like this censorship is hypocritical, where those that are allowed to be shown and those that aren’t are purely selectable when and if they wish to enforce their own narrow-minded rubbish on a population that is crying out for such basic freedoms. I find it all very strange and unsettling. It is, in the end, another reason for everyone to just leave Malta and find a better place to live. Don’t our politicians know that that is what is on a lot of people’s minds; to just up and leave a country as ridiculous as Malta where we can't even watch a play (lest it influences us)? Who on Earth wants to live in a place where a play can be banned because of its themes? It s a play for God’s sake-not an advert. It’s art.
Dave Barton
Jun 28th 2010, 19:51
How shameful that a government authority would intentionally misrepresent what a work of art was about, solely in order to suggest that it is somehow doing its people a favor by depriving them of their rights to see it.
DISCUSSIONS of the subjects in question--because that's what we're talking about here--is NOT support of those things.
Censorship of images is bad enough.
Censorship of ideas?
Welcome to the Gulag.
MBorg
Jun 28th 2010, 19:31
@ Jo Caruana
" Art imitates life ."
Really ? When was the last time you stitched up your vagina, ate somebody else's excrement. ,raped someone or killed a child ?
Art imitates life, my foot ! This play is a load of rubbish. Contrary to what you think it is not embarrassing for Malta to ban this play. If the world is going to the dogs, why should we follow just to be modern?
Kenneth Zammit Tabona
Jun 28th 2010, 19:41
I wouldnt ask Jo if I were you! Ask the social workers if you want to know how low the human psyche can sink.
And please please leave the poor dogs out of it
Jo Caruana
Jun 28th 2010, 19:51
Dear MBorg, I did not say that art imitated ME, I said art imitated LIFE. I think you'll find that all of those things do happen (Church CHILD sex scandal, anyone? Twogirlsonecup? Female genital mutilation?), and you can choose to be blinded and small-minded, or you can choose to accept the society we live in. Or you could choose to hop into your time-travel machine to the era of your choice, and leave the rest of us to our modern, open-minded and enlightened existence.
Fabien Sant Fournier
Jun 28th 2010, 20:08
if things are as grim as they seem, closing your eyes, putting your hands over your ears and singling la la laaaa! isnt going to help!
Besides that's not the issue. Whether this performance is 'rubbish' or not is a judgment for me to make. Neither you nor this judge can enforce your opinion upon others!
This censorship board should work on censoring the internet in Chinese style as the internet is rife with all kinds of perversions!
david debattista
Jun 29th 2010, 07:28
Well said Mr Borg, Its Sick!!!
Kenneth Zammit Tabona
Jun 28th 2010, 19:27
Ban Titus Andronicus; infanticude and cannibalism Ban Medea; infanticide Ban The Bacchae; more infanticide and cannibalism Ban The Duchess of Malfi.............again...............and again Ban The Importance of Being Earnest for setting such a bad example Ban Othello and Otello for murder of wife Ban The Scottish Play; for regicide and god knows what else Ban Traviata; it deals with prostitutes....albeit Parisian high class ones Ban Murder in the Cathedral lest people get bright ideas Ban The White Devil; we dont like waking the demons here Ban Antony and Cleopatra for illicit love and rampant sex Ban Romeo and Juliet for lack of respect of their parents' sentiments Ban The Lion in Winter lest the young get ideas beyond their station Ban Manon Lescaut as it deals with another girl gone to the bad Ban Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf? because it descibes pathological marital stress Ban The Rape of the Lock; we dont do rape in Malta, we're Maltese Ban No Sex Please We're British; how dare any other country steal our thunder? Ban La Boheme; more illicit sex and girls gone to the bad Ban Don Carlo ; for would-be parricide and definite infanticide not to mention incest Ban Phaedra.............................................
Jo Caruana
Jun 28th 2010, 19:39
And I believe Disney's The Princess and the Frog BLATANTLY promotes bestiality. Let's ban it!
Jenny Cefai
Jun 28th 2010, 20:35
Don't forget Beauty and the Beast, Jo. Blatant bestiality right there.
Joe Zammit
Jun 29th 2010, 05:13
Kenneth, are you in favour of the banality of the play? Be serious because maturity, not silliness, maketh man!
A Zammit
Jun 28th 2010, 19:18
I'm confused. Did the judge watch the same play I did? The play I watched had no degradation of women nor excrement, nor rape nor infanticide. even less did it disrespect the holocaust. did the judge actually WATCH the play or did he condemn it solely on a reading? and i'm also confused as to what this now means. Should I go watch a film at one of our local cinemas and someone on screen utters a blasphemous word - could I theoretically sue cos my morals have been offended? Could i sue the government? Because this is what i'm getting from this ruling! well said ms caruana - this may well be iran.
Joe Zammit
Jun 29th 2010, 05:21
Mr Zammit, it's one thing to mention something immoral and it's another to praise immorality. The banality of the play deserves the ban. Plays should raise the morality of spectators not debase it. 'Stitching' is literally trash! The censorship board and judge deserve all praise.
Jo Caruana
Jun 28th 2010, 19:08
Absolutely shocking. How embarrassing for Malta on an international artistic level. Art imitates life, and if the Maltese public is so shocked by the themes of this play, then they should open their eyes and look inward at our society, which demonstrates every single theme that Stitching, or any play, ever could - only on a real level. Just because you ban something, it doesn't make it go away. In this day and age I would thank the Classification Board for not deeming me to be an idiot and thus not deciding what I, an adult, should and should not watch. They should stick to their job role and 'classify', not ban. Who qualified these people anyway? I fully support the producers of Stitching, and all those involved, and appeal to them to take this issue to the EU where, doubtlessly, this decision will be laughed at and revoked in the manner in which it should have been here. Adrian Vassallo should be happy - this IS Iran.
Maria Azzopardi
Jun 29th 2010, 14:53
I agree
KJ Tabone
Jun 28th 2010, 18:58
"Furthermore, the fact that a person was allowed to blaspheme in public, even on stage, went against the law." Wow, seriously? If that were the case, I think more than half of the Maltese population would be in jail, or fined! Or as the joke goes, in heaven they use our blasphemy counter as a fan ;)
B Crocker
Jun 28th 2010, 18:51
Now all touring companies should backlist Malta because their plays could be banned. I have also copied this report to the actors union in the uk to see what they think.
Andrew Farrugia
Jun 28th 2010, 18:43
The Civil Court has concluded that PERVERSION, BESTIALITY, NEGATIONISM, RACISM, OBJECTIFICATION of WOMEN, SEXISM, INFANTICIDE and RAPE cannot be tolerated in a CIVIL, DEMOCRATIC and TOLERANT society. Now, I wonder how some enlightened pundits are going to react! After all, they seem to have a monopoly on VALUES.
Raphael Vassallo
Jun 28th 2010, 19:12
Some of us even know where the caps lock is on our keyboard...
John Attard
Jun 28th 2010, 20:21
And, I am sure, you have something to teach us about DEMOCRACY and TOLERANCE? I doubt that very much.
Joseph Attard
Jun 29th 2010, 00:07
You seem to think that anything that comes out of the Courts is fine and correct - well, it is ... as long as you agree with it. The Supreme Court of the USA has just agreed with the use of fire-arms .. do you agree with that??? You write about 'civil', 'democratic' and 'tolerant' but you seem to have absolutely no idea how to spell them. What is it to you that this play has not been allowed to be put up? Do you feel so weak in your faith, in your mores, in your everything ... in a way that you want your neighbours to live the way you do?
fabien sant fournier
Jun 28th 2010, 18:42
Malta democratic and pluralistic? ..pull the other one!
Alfred Bugeja
Jun 28th 2010, 18:36
Hear hear! I cannot but express my approval for this sentence.
Mr. Justice Zammit McKeon is showing his worth, despite him being appointed merely a year ago.
Andrew Farrugia
Jun 28th 2010, 18:29
Are these the values that MP Owen Bonnici wants to defend under the guise of freedom of expression? BESTIALITY, PERVERSION, NEGATIONISM, SEXISM, OBJECTIFICATION of WOMEN, BODILY MUTILATION, RAPE, INFANTICIDE. One must admit that the loud, foul-mouthed libertarian brigade sure have some confusion in their addled brains.
t attard
Jun 28th 2010, 18:24
A very sad day for the performing arts in Malta.
GiovDeMartino
Jun 28th 2010, 18:17
PROSIT! Jista', imma xi hadd, bhal Ms. Friggieri, tghidli kif teatru publiku dam snin kbar juri BISS pornografija u qatt ma ttiehdu ebda passi? Nixtieq xi hadd fl-awtorita jillumunani naqra. Imma bir-riha se nibqa'!
MBorg
Jun 28th 2010, 18:15
Well done to the Civil Court. People seem to think that because of human rights and freedom of expression they can do and say anything. Well this court case has proved the opposite
David Buttigieg
Jun 28th 2010, 18:26
How sweet, except that you don't really believe it ends here do you? There are higher courts still, and if necessary the ECHR which has overturned Maltese court decisions before, and views censorship the way the rest of Europe sees it !
A. Farrugia
Jun 28th 2010, 17:55
Fl-ahhar... mela jidher li baqa naqra sens f'dan il-pajjiz wara kollox! Prosit lill-Qorti ta' l-punti li semmiet f'dan l-artiklu. Minghajr ma nkunu puritani zzejjed, tajjeb li nghidu li mhux kollox jghaddi, wkoll.