Film Censorship: Cut!

• Author: Michael Cocoman
• Position: Final Year Business & Legal Studies, University College Dublin
• Pages: 14-22

Cork Online Law R eview 2006 2

Cocoman, Film Ce nsorship: Cut!

!

!

∀#

FILM CENSORSHIP: CUT!

Michael Cocoman*

This essay is a concise, detailed account of Irish Censorship law from

the first legislative enactment in 1923, the Censorship of Films Act 1923, to

the modern day. The essay deals with the considerable developments in the

relevant law in line with Ireland’s changing society. Irish film classifications

have increased and broadened, as have the sanctions for breach of the

provisions. The essay notes that the need for vigilance regarding the

emerging multimedia environment and gives a comprehensive analysis of

the legislatures response and reaction to such.

Since the era of silent movies, the censorship of films in Ireland has

been legally enforced initially through local authorities and later through the

Censorship of Films Act 1923. Remarkably, this act continues to govern film

censorship today, along with minor amendments in 1925, 1930, 1970 and

1992. This paper addresses the legal status of film, video and DVD censorship

in Ireland and proposes abolishing censorship in favour of reformed

classification reflecting not only the constitutional freedom of expression1 but,

and to a greater degree, the modern phenomenon of multimedia proliferation.

The stimulus to which this work responds is this extract from the Annual

Report for 2004 of the current Film Censor John Kelleher:

The role of the Film Censor, as set out in the 1923 Censorship of Films

Act, was defined for times that could scarcely be more different to the

social, cultural and media environment that obtains in Ireland today.

Indeed the term ‘Censor’ itself has long since been discarded as a title by

most other countries. In my view, despite its critics, the main reason that

the 1923 Act has broadly stood the test of ch anging times is because those

who drafted it defined the determining factor in certifying (or censoring)

a film to be the opinion of the Film Censor. The phrase ‘in the opinion of

the Film Censor’ enabled the Film Censor of the day to exercise discretion

in deciding what might or might not be, for example, ‘obscene’ or

‘contrary to public morality’. Although introduced more recently, the

Video Recordings Act, 1989, has also been somewhat overtaken by events,

not least the ad vance of technology and a rapidly changing media

marketplace.2

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

* Final Year Busine ss & Legal Studies, University Co llege Dublin

1 Bunreacht na hÉi reann, Article 40.6.1: (i) The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the

following rights, s ubject to public order and moralit y: i. The right of the citizens to exp ress

freely their convict ions and opinions. The education of public opinion being, however , a

matter of such gra ve import to the common good, th e State shall endeavour to ensure that

organs of public o pinion, such as the radio, the pres s, the cinema, while preserving th eir

rightful liberty of e xpression, including criticism of Government policy, shall not be u sed to

undermine public order or morality or the authority of the State.

The publication or utterance of blasphemous, sediti ous, or indecent matter is an offen ce

which shall be pun ishable

in accordance with law.

2 Annual Report of the Film Censor 2004, p.8.