cases and controversies in Australia

This pages considers blasphemy cases and controversies in Australia.

It covers -

• introduction
• William Jones (1871)
• Brian, Hail Mary and The Last Temptation (1986)
• Pell, Serrano and the NGV
• Perkins and van der Linden (2004)

     introduction

In considering Australian prosecutions for blasphemy since the 1780s we can differentiate between

• a handful of cases concerned with print publications, films and visual artworks
• a much larger of instances of 'bad language', prosecuted under summary offences or other public order legislation

The 'major cases' have attracted media, government and scholarly attention and agitation by advocacy groups. Arguably they have often derived from overseas models, with local provocateurs, zealots and 'concerned citizens' emulating excitement in London, New York or other cultural centres.

In contrast, day by day profanity - particularly among workingclass males - has been largely unremarked by the mass media. It has atracted academic attention primarily in relation to questions of civility, class, gender and national identity. The number of warnings, fines or short-term prison sentences imposed by magistrates for "misusing The Lord's name" or other blasphemous speech has not been tabulated and patterns in offences over the past 220 years are thus unclear.

In relation to 'major cases' during that period there appears to have been a shift from prosecutions initiated by the state to those initiated by individuals or advocacy groups. It is difficult to escape the sense that in recent years attempts to launch prosecutions have

• been aimed at strengthening the identity of particular affinity groups (portrayed to members as surrounded by a "sea of immorality" of facing discrimination not encountered by other faiths) rather than changing society at large
• sought to secure media attention for (and thereby increase or sustain the membership base of) small advocacy groups and their leaders
• not necessarily had the support of major religious groups or community leaders
• encountered a largely indifferent audience.

     William Lorando Jones

The 1871 prosecution in NSW of William Lorando Jones featured the charge that

being a wicked and evil disposed person, and disregarding the laws and religion of the said colony, wickedly, profanely, devisedly, and intending to bring the Holy Scriptures and the Christian religion into disrepute and contempt among the people of the said colony, and to blaspheme God unlawfully and wickedly, and blasphemously in the presence and hearing of divers subjects of our lady the Queen, [he] spoke and pronounced, and with a loud voice published ... profane and blasphemous words ... to the high displeasure of Almighty God, to the great scandal and reproach of the Christian religion, to the evil example of all others in the like case offending, and against the peace of Our Lady the Queen, her Crown and Dignity

Jones was convicted - with a £100 fine - for claims that the Bible was "the most immoral book that ever has been published" and "not a fit book for any female to read", that the children of Israel murdered the Egyptians, that Elisha "murdered a number of priests of Baal by his God's authority" and that Moses "saved 40,000 Midianitish women to make them prostitute to his soldiers".

Mr Jones, however imprudent, had been reading his Old Testament and in retrospect his claims - albeit expressed with some emotion - echo comments made by biblical scholars since at least the 1850s. Jones was not, however, lecturing in the theology faculty at Gottingen, Heidelberg or Cambridge to a learned audience: statements to the lower orders in Parramatta were less acceptable.

     Brian, Hail Mary and The Last Temptation

[under development]

     Pell, Serrano and the NGV

A century later Justice Harper of the Supreme Court of Victoria refused to grant an injunction - in Pell v Council of Trustees of the National Gallery of Victoria - to prevent opening of an exhibition at the National Gallery of Victoria. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne sought that restriction on the basis that Andres Serano's Piss Christ artwork was blasphemous, contravening section 17(1)(b) of the Summary Offences Act 1966.

The Gallery's QC noted that the image was already accessible through books and a recent ABC television series by noted art historian Robert Hughes

Justice Harper commented that there it was unnecessary to rule on whether the law of blasphemy existed in Victoria, refusing the injunction on the technical grounds that a civil court will not exercise criminal jurisdiction and will not restrain what may or may not be a legal act by using a civil remedy such as an injunction.

His opinion was that Australia "need not bother with blasphemous libel" as a multicultural and tolerant society, noting that blasphemous libel was an anachronism of English history from a time when the State was intrinsically linked with an established Church (a relationship not recognised in Victoria and prohibited by section 116 of the federal Constitution).

Harper noted that 'blasphemous libel' - if in existance in Victoria - protects only Christian religions (of potential concern to Buddhist, Islamic, Jewish or other faiths). In suggesting that it would have to be shown that the exhibition raised the risk of a breach of the peace, including widespread social unrest he found that there was no evidence before him of any unrest of any kind.

     Perkins and van der Linden

In 2004 David Perkins for the fundamentalist 'Catch the Fire Ministries', argued in the Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) that

The Quran contradicts Christian doctrine in a number of places and, under the blasphemy law, is therefore illegal

Responding to vilification litigation under the Victorian Racial & Religious Tolerance Act 2001 he claimed that "Australia's blasphemy law was intended to protect only Christianity" and that action to curb the teaching of Christian doctrine was invalid.

In the same vein he is reported as arguing that

The law refers to "lawful religion," which disqualifies Islam, because it preaches violence

That is a curious proposition, given the OT emphasis on "righteous anger" and the history of many sects over two millennia.

2004 also saw action by Andre van der Linden, claiming that use of 'Jesus Christ' as a swearword in television drama Prime Suspect breached the federal broadcasting code and state law.

The Australian Broadcasting Authority referred to community standards in dismissing the complaint (PDF), consistent with studies about community expectations and everyday use of such language.

  next page  (overseas)