Home Affairs Portfolio Committee

2 May 2007

Film and Publications Amendment Bill Submission

Firstly, we would like to express our support for the Film and Publications Amendment Bill, especially as it aims to give greater protection from sexually explicit material to children. Having said that, we have several concerns regarding the Bill that we would like to raise.

The Christian Action Network consistently warned of the disastrous effects of pornography for society long before pornography was decriminalised in 1996, and will continue to do so until pornography is criminalized again. Our Network has been equipping people to fight the pornography plague since 1991. More needs to be done to curb the flood of sexually explicit material that is pumped out on almost every radio and television channel, in newspapers and now on even cell phones.

1. Concern Over Requirement of Pre-classification of Potential Hate Speech (Section 16.2)

We are concerned that the requirement of pre-classification of the broadly defined categories of Section 16(2), especially, point (d): “the advocacy of hatred based on any identifiable group characteristics”, could restrict religious freedom of religious groups to publicise and distribute their viewpoints, for example, on the issue of homosexuality.

2. Pornography Harms Children

Liz Jones has counseled hundreds of sexually abused children in the years she has worked for Safeline, an organisation that counsels children who have been either sexually abused or have been involved the sexual abuse of others. She counseled one boy who had sexually abused several of his classmates. He admitted to Liz that he had watched a pornographic TV programme on E-TV called ‘Emmanuelle’. Liz Jones explained to us that children such as these become over sexualised. Now even watching soapies like ‘Generations’ or ‘Days of our Lives’ becomes a problem.

Liz Jones says, “Children explain to me that when they see people kissing or lying in bed together, then they think of a porn movie they’ve seen and then they understand what is going to happen. They say that the poor can’t afford porn, but amongst our clients, there’s a lot of it. It’s difficult to change the behaviour of children who are abusing others, especially if they have seen it in porn movies or magazines.”

Many paedophiles and serial rapists have admitted to being exposed to porn from a very young age. One example of this is a Michiel Meintjies, who was convicted of sodomising three young boys and showing pornographic material to several young children. According to testimony given, Meintjies had himself been exposed to pornography from a very young age (South African Press Association, 19 February 2003).

In short, exposing children to pornography, is, in itself, a form of child sexual abuse and leads some children to sexually abuse others. Heavier penalties than simply a fine or five-year imprisonment (see Section 24B.4), should be imposed on those that expose children to pornography.

3. Ban Pornography from Television

The above example of the pornographic TV programme ‘Emanuelle’ illustrates the need for pornography on television to be banned. Even though this programme was shown after eleven at night, this boy was still able to watch it.

We are pleased that television is being addressed in this Bill. However, we feel that classification of films and programmes is not enough. Television is one of the most pervasive and, therefore, most potentially harmful mediums. Pornography should never be classified as entertainment. Classification is not enough to protect children from the potentially harmful effects of sexually explicit material. Many children are watching TV late at night without their parents’ supervision and are viewing pornographic films. We urge you to ban pornographic films from television altogether.

4. Pre-planned Sexually Explicit Material in Newspapers Should be Submitted Prior to Publication

Although submission of newspapers prior to publication is not possible, pre-planned sexually orientated material and advertisements should be submitted to the Film and Publications Board for classification, prior to publication. Tabloid newspapers such as Die Son and the Daily Voice (published in Cape Town) often feature sexually explicit material (such as bare-breasted women). These tabloids are almost certainly getting into the hands of children.

5. Lowering of XX Classification (Section 16.4c)

We are concerned that the XX classification has been lowered to X18. Section 16 of Act 65 of 1996 Point 13.(4) has been changed to read, “The classification committee shall, in the prescribed manner, examine a publication referred to it and (c) classify the publication as X18 if it contains visual presentations or descriptions or representations of- (ii) the explicit infliction of sexual or domestic violence, or (iii) the explicit effects of extreme violence.”

This amendment would also allow distribution of pornographic, X18 films (albeit at adult-only stores). We find it reprehensible that any form of sexual or domestic violence should be tolerated or permitted as ‘entertainment’. This type of material should be refused classification because of its dangerous potential effects for both children and women. We seek clarification from the Committee as to why this classification has been lowered.

6. Freedom of Expression Should Not Be Abused

Surely obscene (or pornographic) expressions should be considered discriminatory to women and children?

We would agree that the right to freely create, speak, write and publish sentiments or expressions on all subjects should be protected. However, obscene, defamatory and profane expressions are licentious and are an abuse of the right to freedom of expression. These abuses should be punishable by law.

One always has to balance rights against section 36 of the Constitution which provides for rights to be limited where it is reasonable and justifiable to do so having regard to all relevant factors.

One idea is to replace our Bill of Rights with a Bill of Responsibilities.  Is it right that “freedom of expression” is used to protect disgraceful behaviour?

We call for all forms of sexually explicit material to be criminalised. No-one should be allowed to profit from the abuse and degradation of women and children.