Church-appointed experts are insisting that a proposed law to ban conversion therapy would limit the type of help an individual would be able to receive.

The seven members of the panel reacted yesterday to widespread criticism of the conclusions they had reached in an analysis of the Bill.

They rejected criticism that the position paper released last Saturday equated homosexuality with a disease or linked it to child abuse.

In a statement released by the Curia under their names, the ex-perts reiterated that conversion therapy “against one’s own free and informed consent” was to be prohibited. But they argued any adult person should be free to have whatever psychological and therapeutic services “desired or required” in relation to sexual orientation, identity and gender.

“It is ironic that in a democratic country which claims to promote civil liberties, the proposed Bill permits only counselling that can help an individual explore one’s sexual identity but prohibits voluntarily assistance for people seeking to resolve doubts or questions related to their sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression through appropriate forms of therapy,” the experts said.

Last Sunday, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said that he was “immensely disappointed” with the Church committee’s paper.

He described it as a “belief from the dark ages”. Dr Muscat yesterday reiterated his criticism, insisting he was against the fundamental concept underpinning the paper that equated homosexuality to illness or paedophilia.

The seven experts said it was unfortunate that the reactions to the Church’s position paper did not correspond to what they had written.

“There is nothing in the paper that can be remotely construed as implying that homosexuality is a disease or disorder. It is untrue that the paper links homosexuality with child abuse and there is no statement in the paper which expresses negative sentiments or disrespect towards the dignity of LGBTIQ people,” the committee said yesterday.

They insisted that the paper did not advocate the suppression and elimination of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. On the contrary, they added, the paper said these elements had to be affirmed rather than changed or repressed.

“This is an ethical and legal principle which cannot be compromised,” they said in the statement.

The words originally used in the position paper were: “This is a valid ethical and legal principle.”

The panel of seven was made up of theology faculty dean Fr Emmanuel Agius, law faculty dean Kevin Aquilina, constitutional lawyer Austin Bencini, former human rights judge Giovanni Bonello, lecturer Nadia Delicata, psychologist Fr Paul Galea and theology professor Fr George Grima.

The proposed legislation

What is the Bill called?

The Affirmation of Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Gender Expression Act.

How is conversion therapy defined?

The Bill defines this as treatment that aims “to change, repress and, or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or, gender expression”.

Does conversion therapy apply to counselling given to an individual confused by his sexual orientation?

No. The definition of conversion therapy specifically excludes any counselling related to the exploration of one’s identity. This means it is perfectly legitimate for a professional to impart advice to clients seeking clarity about sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

What will be outlawed?

It will be illegal for any person to perform conversion therapy on a vulnerable person. It will be unlawful for any person to perform conversion therapy on any person if this is involuntary or forced. Advertising conversion therapy will also be banned. But the law also makes specific reference to professionals and makes it clear it would be a criminal offence for them to offer conversion therapy to any person, whether against monetary compensation or for free. It will also be illegal for a professional to refer any individual to other professionals or any other person to perform conversion therapy.

How is a vulnerable person defined?

A person who is under 18, suffering from a physical or mental infirmity and considered by the court to be particularly at risk when taking into account age, maturity, health, disability, social or other conditions.

What are the penalties?

If a professional is found guilty he is liable to a fine ranging between €2,000 and €10,000 and/or a prison term ranging from three months to one year. For ordinary individuals found guilty of performing conversion therapy, the fine ranges between €1,000 and €5,000, while the prison term ranges between one month and six months.

The Church’s position paper

Does the position paper equate homosexuality with illness?

The position paper argues that the proposed law will hinder free access to professional guidance, advice and “any other therapeutic help” that may be appropriate with respect to sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. The constant use of the word “therapy” can be interpreted as a reference to homosexuality as an illness requiring treatment.

But the Bill allows counselling. What does the paper say about this?

The Church paper says the proposed law would allow counselling to help the individual explore his sexual identity but prevents this from going further. It argues that in some instances “appropriate forms of therapy” could assist in affirming sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. The paper describes this “a rather strange kind of logic”.

Does it equate homosexuality with paedophilia?

The position paper reaches the conclusion that if the Bill becomes law it will be a crime to assist paedophiles if they are gay. This gives the impression that paedophilia is a condition that could be treated by repressing a person’s sexual orientation. Framed within this context it can be seen to play on the mistaken notion that gay people are paedophiles.

What is the principle objection to the Bill?

The position paper repeatedly makes the argument that the Bill would hinder everyone from having “free access” to professional guidance. The paper expresses preoccupation with individuals who of their own free will seek to have “appropriate forms of therapy to change their own sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression”. It also argues that professionals could be hindered from offering the right assistance to clients out of fear of falling foul of the law.

Does the paper condemn conversion therapy?

It does not. The paper describes the assumption underlying the Bill that sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression is to be affirmed rather than changed, repressed or eliminated as “a valid ethical and legal principle”. But the paper is built on the premise that an individual can change sexual orientation and should be able to receive such therapy to help him in this endeavour.

Why does the Church argue that the Bill goes against existing gender legislation?

The paper says prohibiting therapy which could help an individual change gender identity contradicts the existing Gender Identity Act that allows an individual to undergo a medical intervention to change sex. However, critics of the Church paper argue the Gender Identity Act allows individuals to “re-align” their physical appearance with their gender identity and has nothing to do with conversion therapy.

Why does the paper claim the Bill is discriminatory?

The Church paper builds this premise on what it describes as “the accepted meaning” of conversion therapy – treatment directed at changing the orientation of a person from “homosexual to heterosexual”. It goes on to argue that if the Bill becomes law, it will be a crime to assist a person with homosexual orientation to become heterosexual, but perfectly legitimate to assist a heterosexual to become homosexual. However, the Bill does not describe conversion therapy in this way and this leaves open the question as to how the paper reached this conclusion.