The Gag Order

2010: Yeah, it sounds like the future, but my hover skateboard and phaser gun seem to have gone missing! Instead, out here on the farthest, weirdest edge of Europe, we’re keeping things nice and retro in this sci-fi sounding year by reintroducing some Middle Ages-style blasphemy laws.

To quote: “A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €25,000. He or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion.”
Hot Press asked Michael Nugent, of campaigning secularist group Atheism Ireland, what he thinks of this absurd new addition to the Irish statute book.
“Well, there are two categories of concern. One is that it’s a silly law,” says Nugent. “Blasphemy is a theological concept and it shouldn’t have any place in the criminal law of a pluralistic country. When there are a number of religions it doesn’t make sense – any one religion’s stated beliefs are blasphemous to another religion’s stated beliefs.”
For example: in 2006 Pope Benedict XVI quoted a 14th century Byzantine emperor – and caused quite a bit of offence – when he said: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman.”
On January 1, Atheism Ireland marked the introduction of the new law by publishing this sentence on their website – one of 25 (arguably) ‘blasphemous’ quotations thus enshrined. Also on the list was “Actually, I’m a bit gay” – that one from ‘Jesus’ in Jerry Springer: The Opera. A law that criminalises that kind of joke sounds like a joke itself. But Irish Independent cartoonist Aongus Collins reckons there’s a real and serious dimension to the blasphemy law when it comes to freedom of speech.
Here’s why: the maximum fine for blaspheming is €25,000. The only possible defence, under the terms of the law, is that “a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value in the matter to which the offence relates.”
According to Collins: “The problem is that you have to defend yourself in court. A national broadcaster or a national newspaper will have a libel fund. But a small book publisher or a small magazine could be literally bankrupted because legal costs are so high in Ireland. What it does is that any small publisher of, say, [militant atheist] Richard Dawkins in Ireland would have to go to a barrister before publishing. It is intended to have a chilling effect on free speech.”
Collins believes that for non-mainstream publishers – bloggers, freelance journalists, left-field magazines, smaller or radical publishing houses – the new law, with its hefty fine, will be a meaningful and material inhibition to freedom of expression.
“I work for the Irish Independent, the Irish Times and the [Sunday] Tribune, but I got started working in smaller magazines like In Dublin. In the 1980s, I did a few cartoons that were a bit close to the bone in terms of the Catholic Church. I didn’t think twice in my 20s or 30s – but I would now. A small magazine would have to decide if it can afford to go to court.”
Another disturbing aspect of this law, and one that has been very much under-reported since the Bill was first announced last year, is the powers given to the Gardaí. Where a garda has reason to believe that copies of a “blasphemous statement” are to be found at a premises – including a dwelling – he or she is authorised, “if necessary by the use of reasonable force… to seize and remove any copies.”
“I’m a cartoonist and it’s very easy to offend, for example, Islam,” Aongus says. “The definition of blasphemy is so subjective. It’s carte blanche for some religious extremist to make a complaint to the guards. If they make a complaint, the guards can enter a business premises or even enter your house and grab all copies of this statement. So they could take your PC.”

International Implications
For many Irish people, the blasphemy law seems like a depressingly familiar throwback to the days when Monty Python’s Life of Brian was banned. That’s not so far from living memory, kids – 1987 to be precise. But Michael Nugent believes we shouldn’t just look at this law just in the context of our own, fairly miserable, history of censorship and of the cultural dominance of the church. We should pay close attention to the international implications.
“At the UN for the last 10 years, the Islamic countries have been trying to make defamation of religion a crime and the western states, including Ireland, are opposing those attempts. But now they have the opportunity to say, ‘Here’s one of your own countries doing this’,” says Nugent.
The Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) – the collective body representing Muslim states – has already adopted the wording of Ireland’s blasphemy law for the purposes of lobbying the UN General Assembly to introduce an international treaty criminalising defamation of religion. Now there is a contribution to the campaign for Freedom of Ideas!
So you’re probably wondering why in the name of god (oops – blasphemy?) this law was enacted? It’s a bit of a mystery. Before news of the blasphemy Bill came out last year, Foreign Affairs Minister Mícheál Martin had been actively opposing the OIC’s attempts to have blasphemy declared a crime. Surprisingly, there is no evidence to suggest that the Catholic Church lobbied for this new law. Neither did the Protestant churches, nor the Islamic community in Ireland – although the latter subsequently welcomed it.
The official line from Justice Minister Dermot Ahern (he wasn’t available for interview) seems to be that his hands were tied: previously, blasphemy was prohibited by the Constitution but there was no corresponding crime on the statute books. Fianna Fáil TD Seán Connick, convenor of the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, told Hot Press the Government had a choice between a referendum on the blasphemy provision in the Constitution and reform of the existing law. It was the Minister’s choice, and he went down the road of ‘reform’. Too much is being “read into” this piece of legislation, he added.
Connick denies the blasphemy law will stifle free speech, using as a (slightly mystifying) example, last year’s pseudo-scandal, Portraitgate – when a nudey picture of the Taoiseach was hung on the wall of the National Gallery.
But RTÉ was pressurised into issuing a full apology for reporting that story. “What one person finds humorous, another person might find offensive,” responds Connick.
Words of wisdom indeed – which underline very well the dangerous side to this blasphemy law.
By all accounts, Dermot Ahern is highly conservative. He (in)famously spoke against the de-criminalisation of homosexuality in the Dáil in 1993 (“We have a duty to legislate for the standards and norms which we regard as appropriate for the Irish people.”) In light of this, some observers have speculated that the influence of hardcore Catholic organisation Opus Dei within the public service might have been a factor behind the blasphemy law. We are unlikely to find out.
Whatever the impetus, it’s pretty clear that anyone publishing or broadcasting in Ireland on the topic of religion is going to have this law at the back of their mind. Michael Nugent says most media organisations have shied away from printing the exact words of Atheist Ireland’s 25 ‘blasphemous’ quotations. And Hot Press has already spoken to one frequent participant on RTÉ’s The Panel, who said he was reminded to be aware of the new law – even before it was enacted on January 1.
So far, one month and two weeks into 2010, no one has yet been prosecuted yet for ‘grossly offending’ Jesus, Allah, Yahweh or any other deity.
As they say in the clearly aberrant and thoroughly blasphemous Life of Brian: “Always look on the bright side of life.”

TWENTY MAJOR, BLOGGER
“I think it’s beyond stupid. How can it possibly be enforced? To successfully prosecute somebody surely you have to prove the existence of God. As that’s beyond anyone’s capability, it seems entirely redundant.
“Frankly, it is embarrassing that such a law exists and for a supposedly secular nation to be wasting time over something like this is farcical – plus you would imagine the government would have better things to do at this moment in time.
“It will have no affect whatsoever on what I do and will steadfasten my belief that the country is run by idiots.
“Plus, if there really was such a thing as God, you’d imagine, being omnipetent and all that, he’d have a good grasp of PR and wouldn’t have the witless cunts who claim to represent him make him look like such a twat all the time.”

URSULA RANI SARMA, PLAYWRIGHT
“My first reaction was that I thought it was a joke. I’m struggling to take it seriously. I don’t see how they can go about enforcing something so subjective. In my experience, something that’s blasphemous to one person could be an entertaining observation to someone else.
“It wouldn’t at all affect my work. How would you ever decide what is ‘grossly abusive’?
“It’s so important now, of all times, that we start to question religion in all shapes and sizes, rather than reinforce this sense of fear of the Catholic Church. Any legislation based on fear I consider to be highly negative – and any that infringes on freedom of speech, especially in this day of age.
“It’s so intrinsic in the Irish nature to look for humour in the subjects that shock us and that we are fearful of, and that seems to be the territory that could be targeted – if you try to poke fun or analyse.”

ABIE PHILBIN BOWMAN, COMEDIAN
“In the midst of a devastating recession, it’s nice that the Government is providing a badly-needed stimulus to the comedy industry. As a stand-up who has performed blasphemous material in Ireland, the USA, and Pakistan, I find the blasphemy law very flattering. Apparently, my jokes are so dangerous that the Irish government is offering legal protection to the Creator of the Universe. That beats any review I’ve ever had.
“I think the blasphemy law is the product of a dysfunctional mindset. It suggests that society is threatened by too much irreverence. Actually, if you look at Ireland over the last 25 years, you realise that the most devastating scandals were caused by too much reverence. For a long time, Irish society had far too much respect for the church, the politicians and the bankers. That’s why we’re in the mess we’re in. The freedom to mock those in power is vital to a healthy society.”