Appeal tribunal declassifies The Spear

2012-10-10 16:06

The Film and Publication Appeal Tribunal has set aside the “16N” classification of Brett Murray’s controversial painting of President Jacob Zuma, The Spear.

The declassification is relevant to the painting, which was displayed in the Goodman Gallery in Johannesburg, the image published on the gallery’s website and other websites as well as other electronic images.

The Goodman Gallery appealed against the classification on September 17, on the grounds that it was “impermissible and unsustainable”, Sapa reported.

In its ruling the tribunal says it appears the Film and Publication Board (FPB) attempted to use a section of the act governing its work aimed at protecting children to “vindicate the right to dignity of those who were affronted by the painting”.

“They were not, in terms of the law, permitted to do so. The sole objective of restrictive age classifications is to protect children; and to the extent that the Classification Committee attempted to achieve the purposes of protecting sensitive viewers or assuaging the sense of indignity felt by some segments of the community, it erred. It was not legally permissible for it to impose restrictive age classifications to achieve these purposes or objectives.”

The tribunal also found that:
» The FPB should not have considered the complaint against City Press (for publishing an image of the painting on its website) since the board has no jurisdiction over the newspaper or its website.
» The FPB erred in extending its decision to classify The Spear to all websites that had published the image.
» The Classification Committee’s finding was correct that The Spear is not pornographic.
» The Classification Committee was “heavily influenced ... by the need to affirm the dignity of African males and to protect sensitive persons and children”.
» There had been no evidence before the

Classification Committee that “the painting would be harmful to children

on the grounds that it seriously undermines and is insensitive to

African culture”.
» The argument that the presence of nudity in the painting by default deems it “potentially disturbing, harmful or inappropriate to children” is flawed. “It would mean that every artistic work that contained nudity would be deemed presumptively harmful to children.”

» This story was updated after first published.

Join the conversation! encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions. publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.