Sir, – John Horgan correctly writes, in the wake of the horrific Charlie Hebdo murders, that there is a strong argument here for removal of both the constitutional provision on blasphemy, and section 36 of the 2009 Defamation Act, which introduced a statutory blasphemy offence ("Press Council can play role in blasphemy debate", Opinion & Analysis, January 15th). Indeed, the constitutional convention has already recommended a referendum on blasphemy.
However, we do not need to wait for a referendum to repeal or amend the statutory provision – that should be done now through the Oireachtas. As I argued in 2009 when opposing section 36, a statutory definition of the constitutional blasphemy offence could be limited to criminalising only hate speech or incitement to hatred; the Constitution does not require imposition of a €25,000 fine where a person has insulted a matter held sacred by any religion.
As John Horgan says, this sweeping 2009 definition of blasphemy has unfortunately but predictably become a precedent for repressive legislation in other countries.
Sensible and proportionate legal limits may be placed on free speech in every democracy, but it is hard to see how the use of blasphemy laws to stifle satirical commentary may be justified in a republic. – Yours, etc,
IVANA BACIK,
Seanad Éireann,
Leinster House,
Dublin 2.
Sir, – The recent debate has not given sufficient weight to one aspect: the extent to which the flow of satire between western and Muslim societies seems to be a one-way street. All societies throw up worthy targets for satirists. I, for one, would be only too delighted to see a more regular and suitably jaundiced view of life in the so-called liberal democracies coming from those who hold to Muslim values.
I’m sure there must be many aspects of our lives and culture that provoke Muslim disdain, mockery or even barbed humour, up to and including the extent to which Christian religions have become mere cultural remnants in many European countries.
What history of satire has there been in the Muslim world? Has it been stifled by the lack of press freedom and open democratic societies ? Does the Muslim view of what is “sacred” preclude Muslim writers from criticising or even mocking Christian beliefs and adherence? I would very much welcome a perspective on this from informed readers of your newspaper.
In the meantime, and with all due respect to “freedom of speech”, I find the current unequal flow of satire a little bit too much like shooting fish in the proverbial barrel. – Yours, etc,
AODH Ó DOMHNAILL,
Greystones,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – Raymond Deane (January 15th) congratulates The Irish Times for not republishing the "Islamophobic Charlie Hebdo cartoons". As a phobia is an irrational fear I believe this terminology is wrong.
The staff of Charlie Hebdo, and the victims of Boco Haram in Nigeria, have found that these fears are not irrational. Just as the Aztecs and Incas discovered at the hands of Christians before them.
Where you have religion you can have intolerance, then zealots, then people who believe they get to paradise by killing those who disagree with them. We need to be able to challenge these sacred cows with rational argument and ridicule. – Yours, etc,
DAVID DOYLE,
Goatstown,
Dublin 14.
A chara, – It is troubling that in the wake of the atrocities in Paris the narrative regarding freedom of expression in the media includes calls for sensitivity when dealing with aspects of religion or faith. People may be offended by artistic or literary material that mocks a belief that they hold sacred, but nobody has the right not to be offended.
Any argument that begins along the lines of: “I believe in free speech, however . . .” is, in fact, not an argument that favours free speech. – Yours, etc, – Is mise,
NAOISE Ó CIARDHA
South Kensington,
London.
Sir, – Voltaire’s view of defending free speech to the death has been much aired but, given the reluctance to publish the offending cartoons, another of his beliefs may be more relevant: “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.” – Yours, etc,
Dr JOHN DOHERTY
Gaoth Dobhair,
Co Dhún na nGall.