The Min Imissu live comedy show, set to be staged over the weekend at Sir Temi Zammit Hall, was given the green light by a civil court which turned down an attempt to block any reference in the production to controversial River of Love pastor Gordon-John Manche and his wife.
The couple sought to obtain a warrant of prohibitory injunction claiming that the satirical characters of Jordan and Tariella Whiteman, featured in the no-holds-barred comedy, were intended to ridicule the pastor and his wife.
The action, instituted against Carlos Debattista and Abigail Mallia, as directors of Take 2 Ltd, producers of the television show Min Imissu, was sparked off by the fact that the applicants felt irked by the production which poked fun at the pastor and his views on homosexuality.
Mr Justice Anthony Ellul observed that for the past 10 years, Mr Manche had hosted a religious programme on a local station wherein he openly aired his views on the subject of homosexuality, drawing both support and criticism from opposing quarters.
These views had landed the evangelical figure at the centre of a public controversy which prompted the producers of Min Imissu to create the comical characters of Jordan and Tariella Whiteman, mimicking those of Pastor Manche and Ms Blackman.
These characters, which featured prominently in the slapstick comedy television show, becoming a great hit among the local audience, were also to feature in the live comedy staged over this weekend.
The court observed that a balance was to be struck between a person’s ‘honour and dignity’ and the right to freedom of expression. Moreover, one had to admire the ‘creative skill’ behind such productions and the fact that comedy benefited society at large.
With regard to the applicant’s wife, a psychologist by profession, targeted by Min Imissu for her style and mannerisms, the court observed that the latter was a well-known public figure who often participated in television shows.
After viewing clips of the theatrical show, the court noted that the production was to present nothing different to that featured in the television show for the past 18 months, during which the applicants never sought any recourse before the courts.
While rejecting the applicants’ request, noting that they could avail themselves of other judicial remedies for defamation, the court failed to understand the need for the exceptional action for a warrant of prohibitory injunction to alter the content of the satirical show.
Lawyer Roberto Montalto was counsel to the producers.