One cannot help noticing a sharp contrast between the opinion pieces of two Muslim leaders in Malta, both published on September 26.

While Laiq Ahmed Atif speaks of the need to repeal blasphemy laws, pointing out that these have spread hatred, Mohammed El Sadi appears to promote the opposite view: recommending censorship as the price for peace.

El Sadi’s letter also misrepresents the Malta Humanist Association’s views on a number of points. The association did not describe Muslims as “uncivilised, uninformed and brutal”. It was the video’s purpose to portray Muslims as such – and the reaction to it ensured that this was achieved.

MHA understands that blame for the violence is restricted to the perpetrators and their supporters, not to all followers of Islam. The Imam also claimed that we ‘approved’ or somehow ‘endorsed’ the video in question. This is entirely incorrect. In fact, we described the film as puerile and poorly made.

But the quality of the video is hardly what is in question here. Ultimately, the issue concerns human rights, in particular, the right to make such a video, write any book, stage any play or publish any article. This right – freedom of expression – is universal and inalienable, enshrined in the charter of human rights and is in no way dependent on the quality or character of the opinion being expressed.

On the contrary, European human rights case law makes it abundantly clear that “freedom of expression... is applicable not only to information or ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no ‘democratic society’” (Handyside, 1976).

There isn’t much call for the protection of the right to publish material that nobody objects to.

The phrase “I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it” is often incorrectly attributed to Voltaire but still captures the essence of his ethos. Surely, this is a more worthwhile cause to pursue than seeking to silence those with whom we disagree.