I haven't come across the paper that seems sorely to have exercised the Rector of our University, though when I do, I will be sure to take hold of it and give it a rigorous once-over, to see if the glowing praise heaped upon it in the other English language paper is justified.

To quote Ms Bonello, who penned the piece, "The newspaper, Ir-Realta', which is disseminated for free in many parts of Malta, contains well researched and articulated contents, satire and art. It is different from leading newspapers with its hard-punch critique and modern art by local artists, and for this reason, it does not go down well with the conservative elements of this country."

It is published by ‘The Collective', described as "a group of free thinking individuals".

These individuals have characterised the banning of their paper at the University as "a cover up", comparing the ban to the Nazi Burning of the Books. Let's forgive them this slight touch of hyperbole, because it is understandable that when what is supposed to be our premier centre of excellence and the promoter of deep thought deprives its denizens of the opportunity to think for themselves, feelings run high.

I have expressed my thoughts on bans being imposed by those who think they know better while discussing the failure of the Film & Theatre Classification Board to grant a performing license to "Stitching". In case you missed them, I'll summarise said thoughts for you: it was an obscenity (the ban, not the play) and the people responsible should resign and there's an end to it.

You cannot expect to militate in the field of the arts and then seek to impose your (repressive) views on others.

It seems that the Rector has banned the paper from distribution at Tal-Qroqq because it contains discriminatory messages. Precisely why, even if this is the case, the Rector has decided to take the role of prosecuting officer and magistrate is not entirely clear: he is not responsible for the contents of a paper published by others merely because it is distributed on campus.

He is not the headmaster of a primary school after all for all that his students sometimes invite themselves to be treated as such.

So if the Rector cannot be held responsible for the contents of the paper, what moved him to ban it? He might, as is his right, find its contents offensive, although the publishers insist that they are being satirical and trying to get a message across that is positive and not meant to be taken literally, but the Rector's distaste, justified or not as it may be, is not sufficient grounds for a Draconian measure such as ordering the Beadle to traipse around consigning the thing to the trash can.

And even if the Rector can, for some arcane legal reason, be held liable for what is done on his (our, more precisely) campus, surely it behoves our top academic to take a stand for freedom of speech and expression, rather than against it?

It's not as if this was some expression of filthy and vicious racism, after all, or paedophiliac pornography: it is only vileness of these genres that deserves cutting off at source.

Let's hope that better counsel prevails, and soon.

In the meantime, while Voltaire gyrates in his grave, I trust that ‘The Collective' will ensure that sufficient copies of their publication are left around the campus so that even a veritable army of Beadles and Assistant Beadles and Sub-Assistant Beadles and any other minions drafted in by the Rector will be unable to cope.