Court ruling on BA censorship 'an ugly precedent'

Moviment Iva proponent and Labour MP Evarist Bartolo has described a Constitutional Court ruling that upheld the censorship of a Moviment IVA advert as an “ugly precedent” that will allow politicians to have clips pulled off the air simply because they did not give their consent to them.

The ruling follows in the wake of a Constitutional Court case opened by Moviment Iva after the BA pulled a promo clip off the air. The clip showed excerpts from a 2010 interview with Moviment Cana founder Fr Charles Vella where he said: “divorce doesn’t scare me.”

He also pointed out that all local TV stations habitually and regularly, with the “blessing” and “direction” from the BA itself, use each other’s footage without requesting permission.

“Should we now have to start meeting around a table to ask each other permission for every piece of footage we want to use?” he asked.

He also pointed out that the BA had originally accepted for the clip to be aired, and it had been in fact aired twice. “It was only after Fr Vella complained that the BA suddenly found fault with the clip and pulled it off the air,” he said.

He also said that it was accepted that “if someone went on TV, and read the contents of the interview out aloud him or herself, neither the court nor the BA’s legal team would have had any issue.”

Speaking about the ruling, Moviment Iva chairperson Deborah Schembri remarked that the ruling was especially surprising in the light that “everyone agreed that we did not misrepresent Fr Vella or edit what he said in any way.”

She reiterated that since the interview had already been aired on TV, and since Fr Vella is a public figure (as Cana founder), “and since he said what he did fully knowing the shock he would cause,” the ruling is unfounded.

She also pointed out that Moviment Iva had requested and obtained the necessary permissions as stipulated by the BA’s own rules.

“Anyone who thinks we needed his consent is mistaken,” she insisted. “If he said what he did privately, it would be understandable, but he didn’t.”

She confirmed however that the Moviment Iva would not be contesting the decision, “as it would be pointless given how so little time exists for an appeal to be made, a counter argument to be put forward by the BA, for a ruling to be written, and the clip to be aired again.”

“There was no real issue,” Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando insisted. “It was only another obstacle set in our way.”

“It is now up to the BA to deal with the Pandora’s Box that it has now opened,” he added, referring to how the ruling will set the precedent by which all politicians will now have to give their consent when clips featuring their comments are aired, during political campaigns for instance.