The opposition spokesman on culture, Owen Bonnici, asked whether the government moved the Bill amending censorship laws out of conviction or for convenience’s sake.
He said that no government member had defended editor Mark Camilleri who had been prosecuted for publishing a short story by Alex Vella Gera, which the police had classified as obscene. Mr Camilleri was freed by the courts but the Attorney General chose to appeal.
Dr Bonnici said that, in an attempt to appease liberal-minded people, the government changed its tactics after losing the divorce referendum.
Malta was undergoing major changes that could be easily seen through the recent introduction of divorce and the beginning of the IVF debate. People of artistic talents should be at the core of this movement of change towards responsible freedom of expression.
The opposition did its utmost to promote such changes. Dr Bonnici recalled that at the beginning of the legislature he had said that censorship should be thrown out of the window where artistic expression was concerned.
Education Minister Dolores Cristina and former Justice Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici had opposed and the Justice Minister later raised penalties in cases of obscenity without fine-tuning its definition.
Deputy Prime Minister Tonio Borg had later claimed that the two ministers had been quoted incorrectly but added that Cabinet had agreed on a level of censorship that did not take anyone for a ride.
Dr Bonnici said he had exercised his right to call for the setting up of a committee to fine-tune the definition of obscenity so that plays such as Stitching would not be banned and the editor of the publication of the Vella Gera story would not be prosecuted. This committee never met. He had hoped that the committee’s role would be more important than just defining obscenity. Even Culture Minister Mario de Marco had been vague on this issue.
On a point of explanation, Dr de Marco said that the defendants had been freed because the issue was not the law. He had set up a committee to revise laws concerning artistic expression.
Dr Bonnici said that the Bill did not address this issue. He had not been consulted and he only received an acknowledgement after submitting his proposals in the consultation process.
Artists had to be protected in shocking society where there was need to do so. They had to be free to challenge what was conventional.
Dr Bonnici recognised that it was important to have a stocktake of current legislation but highlighted that this should not lengthen the process because this was an urgent matter.
He agreed that a guidance board be set up to help producers classify theatrical pieces but believed that a person with an artistic background should be included.
The work being done to promote Valletta as the European Capital of Culture was positive. It was, however, a shame that the government was not prioritising the creative industry. Talents needed to be incentivised and structures needed to be put in place in order for these to generate employment.
A lot more could have been done in this sector during this legislature and Dr Bonnici highlighted the need for consensus between parties on this subject.
The Bill was an important step in the right direction that would throw theatrical censorship out of the window. It was also important to analyse the effect this would have on artistic expression.