The beat goes on?

Music has always been a medium to stir up controversy — from glass harmonicas being banned briefly in the 18th century for driving people mad, to the censoring of Elvis Presley’s wiggling hips on the US-based Ed Sullivan show in 1957.  Censorship in the music industry is no relic of the past. Only this month, Egyptian authorities announced a bar on “romantic music”. Here are our favourite modern examples of banned music:

Taming the rave

Authorities in England and Wales attempted to curb the fun in 1994, introducing the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act. This defined raves as “illegal gatherings,” putting a stop to any electronic music one might to listen to at an outdoor party. The Act defines banned music as including “sounds wholly or predominantly characterised by the emission of a succession of repetitive beats.” 18 years after the act was introduced, the parties still appear in their masses — as do the police. Here’s Norfolk Police bashing away at some rave equipment following an order for destruction by request of the court:

Sensuality censored

In a bid to halt “vulgarity and bad taste”, music lovers in Cuba were hit with a tough sanction in December: a complete ban of the sexually-charged reggaeton music in the media. Other music genres with aggressive or sexually explicit lyrics will also be curbed, preventing the songs from being played on television or radio. Under legislation passed under President Raul Castro, music can be enjoyed privately, but will also be banned in public spaces — anyone discovered to be breaking the law could be subject to severe fines and suspensions. According to Cuban Music Institute boss Orlando Vistel Columbié, the music genre violates  the “inherent sensuality” of Cuban women. One of the most well-known reggaeton artists is the Puerto Rican born artist Daddy Yankee. Here’s his 2004 hit, Gasolina, which probably wasn’t an anthem for rising petrol prices:

Singing a song of silence

On 23 October 2012, Islamist militants took control of a country steeped in musical history, imposing a total ban of all genres of music in northern Mali. The rebel group jammed radio airwaves and confiscated mobile phones, replacing ringtones with verses from the Quran. Three Islamist groups linked to al-Qaeda have taken control of the northern Malian cities of Timbuktu, Kidal and Gao, banning everything they deemed to breach the religious law of Islam, Sharia. Dozens of musicians have fled the area, and many have been threatened with violence should they practice music again. Mali is famed for its rich cultural heritage and many residing there consider music akin to material wealth. Musician Khaira Arby has fled south since the crisis. Here she is with her band Sourgou:

Careless whispers from Iranian government

Iran had a pop at western music in 2005, decreeing it illegal, along with other “offensive” music. The Supreme Cultural Revolutionary Council banned the music from state-run radio and TV broadcasts. The sounds of Eric Clapton, The Eagles and George Michael were often used as television background music until the ban was imposed. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad left no 80s hallmark unscathed — banning western haircuts like the mullet two years later. George Michael’s 1984 single, Careless Whisper, breaks Iranian law with both music and hairstyles:

Romancing the state

On 13 December, Egyptian authorities banned the broadcast of “romantic” music, insisting that only songs enamoured with the state would be permitted for playing on TV stations. Only nationalistic numbers can now be played on the 23 state-owned channels, and songs mocking public figures will be banned to adhere to the “sensitivity” of the political situation in Egypt. President Mohammed Morsi fervently denied that a decree granting him sweeping powers was permanent recently. Complaints have begun to surface surrounding the musical censorship, with some speculating that it was a move to mask the development of the decree. Egyptian megastar Amr Diab’s most well-known hit, Habibi Ya Nour Al Ain (Darling, You Are The Light of My Eyes), is just one of the many tunes that won’t be heard on the country’s airwaves:

Daisy Williams is an editorial intern at Index. 

Using art to campaign for democracy in Azerbaijan

In Azerbaijan, it is not only journalists who face intimidation, arrests and violence: artists, musicians and writers also come under attack for exercising their right to artistic freedom. To coincide with the UN’s International Human Rights Day, Art for Democracy, a new initiative to support artistic freedom, was launched in Baku.

“Art for Democracy seeks to use all forms of artistic freedom of expression to promote democracy and respect for human rights in Azerbaijan, including to improve the climate for artistic freedom of expression itself”, said Art for Democracy‘s coordinator Rasul Jafarov. “It will also give artists a platform to come together and use their talents to promote democratic change”.

In May, Azerbaijani musician Jamal Ali fled the country in fear of his life after he reported that police tortured him in detention. The rapper had criticised President Ilham Aliyev during a concert. Musician and activist Azer Cirttan is also in exile.

It’s clear that, in addition to more traditional campaigns, including political engagement at the Council of Europe and organised demonstrations in Azerbaijan and around the world, a creative approach to promoting free expression in Azerbaijan is also needed. The campaign will also offer direct support to marginalised artists, who are often persecuted for their work.

Art for Democracy builds on the work of Sing for Democracy, which drew attention to the poor health of free expression in Azerbaijan in the run up to the Eurovision Song Contest, hosted in Baku in May. To celebrate the launch, free speech advocates, including Eurovision 2012 winner, Swedish pop star Loreen, recorded video messages of support.

Azerbaijan hosted the Internet Governance Forum, in November. In an open letter to President Aliyev prominent activist and journalist Emin Milli  lamented the fact that citizens are “do not dare to speak out” against the dictator’s policies, “online or offline”. “You have successfully managed to silence them,” he added.

In this climate, Art for Democracy is an important, fresh voice that will draw together  the country’s most important free expression experts, ensuring that a wider audience is informed about the very serious free expression crisis in Azerbaijan today.

Read Index’s fact file on Azerbaijan, Access Denied

To read Jamal Ali’s modern fable in the current issue of Index on Censorship magazine, subscribe now

 

Anti-Boer song ignites incitement debate

In South Africa, the singing of “struggle songs” remains a bone of contention. Some South Africans contend, along with the courts, that songs should be banned when their lyrics incite violence. Other South Africans regard the songs as a way to remember the anti-apartheid struggle.

On 31 October, South Africa’s ruling African National Congress (ANC), along with former ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema, reached an agreement with the white “minority rights” lobby group AfriForum and the Transvaal Agricultural Union (TAU) to avert the banning of the anti-apartheid struggle song Dubula iBhunu. “Dubula iBhunu” is a vernacular Zulu phrase that translates as “Shoot the Boer”.

AfriForum, along with TAU, and Malema and the ANC in its capacity as political party agreed that:

In the interest of promoting reconciliation and to avoid community friction, and recognising that the lyrics of certain songs are often inspired by circumstances of a particular historical period of struggle which in certain instances may no longer be applicable, the ANC and Malema commit to counselling and encouraging their respective leadership and supporters to act with restraint to avoid the experience of such hurt.

Their agreement has been made an order of the court. The ANC abandoned its appeal against the banning of the song while AfriForum agreed not to pursue the banning of the song. The parties committed themselves to further dialogue to deepen mutual understanding. In practice, ANC leaders will discourage their followers from singing songs deemed “hurtful” to “minority groups”.

Jordi Matas - Demotix

Malema “rediscovered” the anti-apartheid song in 2010

ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema “rediscovered” the anti-apartheid song in March 2010 in the process of bolstering his appeal to young black people who feel excluded from the material benefits of the country’s transition to democracy.

The South African Bill of Rights enshrines freedom of expression but explicitly excludes incitement of violence or advocacy of hatred to incite harm on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender or religion.

AfriForum obtained an order from the High Court last year banning Dubula iBhunu. The judgment found that the song referred to white Afrikaans people as rapists and robbers and dehumanised them by calling them “dogs”. “The process of dehumanisation is recognised … as one of the steps leading to genocide.” Malema was found guilty of hate speech.

The judgment included a reminder that South Africa’s jurisprudence regards

the right to dignity as “at least as worthy of protection as the right to freedom of expression… freedom of expression does not enjoy superior status in our law.”

The ANC appealed against the finding. It also lodged an appeal against another case involving the song: a member of the public, Willem Harmse, had taken another, Mohammed Vawda, to court in 2010 as the latter wanted to use “Dubula iBhunu” during a march against crime. Vawda argued that the song’s lyrics indicated “shooting apartheid” while Harmse, a white farmer, argued that the words could cause him personal harm. The high court had found the song to be an incitement to violence.

The appeal in the Harmse case was postponed in September this year in anticipation of the appeal in the case involving AfriForum, which would have come before the Supreme Court of Appeal this week.

The Mail and Guardian, a leading opinion-making newspaper, questioned the ANC’s decision to withdraw its appeal:

The settlement forestalls the testing of a questionable judgment with far-reaching implications. South Africans should be able to understand that what is legally permissible and what is wise or constructive are not the same. The law must leave wider parameters than political morality.

Nevertheless, South Africa has over the past few years witnessed the rise of a public discourse of intolerance that increasingly invokes violence, including Malema’s public declaration that he would “kill for Zuma” in the run-up to the 2009 election. Jacob Zuma subsequently became ANC leader and South Africa’s president. Rather than it being merely about legality or wisdom, the threat of violence has been used for specific political ends: to intimidate detractors and mobilise support.

In resurrecting Dubula iBhunu, Malema was following the example of Zuma, who had revived another “struggle song”, Awuleth’ Umshini Wami (“Bring My Machine Gun”). Zuma used the song as a war cry when his financial advisor faced a corruption trial in 2005, which implicated him, and when he (Zuma) faced rape charges in 2006.

Christi van der Westhuizen is Index on Censorship’s new South African correspondent

Russia: Pussy Riot detention extended

Three members of Russian punk group Pussy Riot have had their detention extended by a further six months by a Moscow court, reports say [ru]. Maria Alekhina, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Ekaterina Semutsevic will remain in jail until at least January 2013, with their detention already being extended from 24 June to late July. The trio were arrested in March and face charges of hooliganism for allegedly staging an anti-Putin performance in Moscow’s Christ the Saviour Cathedral in February. If convicted they face up to seven years in prison.

Pussy Riot spoke to us exclusively in May, read the interview here.