I am familiar with the script of Stitching and I have even watched it being enacted by professional actors. There is absolutely no reason for somebody to have determined to ban the play being watched by people of their own free will, who have a mind and perception of life of their own and do not need the appreciation of half a dozen people, some of whom are very familiar with the theatre world and have acted in far more controversial plays.

This, naturally, unless there was some hidden agenda by third parties wanting to distract public attention from more censurable matters. I have called and emphatically call again for the immediate resignation of our so-called censors.

At law, the censors` decision is null and void, for it contravenes basic fundamental legal principles, such as the right to a fair hearing and objective defence, impartial and open to the public. No one can be a judge in his own cause. That is exactly what the censors did - there was no independent tribunal to evaluate all the facts objectively.

One other major flaw - how can you judge a play if one does not watch it being performed, as in the case of Stitching?

Stitching will no doubt be staged for the general public and the reaction will unanimously question what all the fuss was about.

If, for the sake of argument, we concede that there was indeed something objectionable in the play, then why should six people determine what I should watch?