Stephen Green, a member of Christian Voice, wanted a Magistrates
Court to issue summonses against the producer of the stage play and
Mark Thompson, Director General of the BBC. The District Judge
refused to issue the summonses and Green sought judicial review of
that decision.
Jerry Springer: the Opera is a parody of the Jerry
Springer chat show. Lord Justice Hughes noted that the TV show's
"stock in trade" is the presentation as entertainment of
dysfunctional people who have lurid stories to tell.
The play is in two acts. The first act lampoons the chat show
and at the end, Springer's character is shot by a guest. The second
act follow's Springer's descent into hell. Satan, Christ, God, Mary
and Adam and Eve appear as foul-mouthed chat show guests.
According to the court, the offence of blasphemous libel
requires "contemptuous, scurrilous and/or ludicrous material
relating to God, Christ, the bible or the formularies of the Church
of England." Second, "the publication must be such as tends to
endanger society as a whole, by endangering the peace, depraving
public morality, shaking the fabric of society or tending to cause
civil strife."
The second element "will not be shown merely because some people
of particular sensibility are, because deeply offended, moved to
protest," the court said. "It will be established if but only if
what is done or said is such as to induce a reasonable reaction
involving civil strife, damage to the fabric of society or their
equivalent."
The court noted that the play had been performed regularly in
major theatres in London for a period of nearly two years "without
any sign of it undermining society or occasioning civil strife or
unrest; there had been no violence (or even demonstrations)."
The case failed for another reason. The Theatres Act of 1968
prevents prosecution for the offence of blasphemous libel in
respect of a live theatrical performance of the work. Broadcasts
are protected in the same way under the Broadcasting Act of 1990.
The District Judge refused the summonses under these Acts'
provisions. The High Court said she was right to do so.
The court also looked at Article 10 of the European Convention
on Human Rights which protects freedom of expression. It said this
provision is consistent with the ancient offence, because Article
10 allows interference with free speech where it is necessary in a
democratic society for the prevention of disorder or crime or the
protection of the rights of others.
The ruling is the first case to be decided on the offence of
blasphemous libel since the 1970s when campaigner Mary Whitehouse
secured a conviction against the publishers of James Kirkup's poem,
The Love that Dares to Speak its Name.
Disclaimer: We hope you find OUT-LAW’s content useful. It’s prepared by the lawyers at Pinsent Masons. Please remember, though, that it’s intended as general information only. It’s not legal advice. If that’s what you’re seeking, please
contact us. See also: our
full disclaimer
