I refer to the letter “‘Officious censor’ puts the record straight” by Charles Pace, director, KRS Distributors Ltd (TMIS, 9 September).

It seems that Mr Pace cannot tell the difference between a censor and a classifier. I am afraid this is his problem not mine. Mr Pace is aware that over the last four years, there was only one film which was banned from our cinema halls and this with Mr Pace’s acquiescence, if not approval. Over the same four-year period however, not one second was censored in any film.

Regarding classification, the five categories are not my invention, they are established by law and the job of the Board of Classifiers is not to question the law but to place a particular film into one of the five established categories. Once a film is so placed, the film distributor has a right of appeal. Once the film is finally classified, such classification has to be observed both by cinema patrons as well as by the cinema management.

Mr Pace goes on to interpret the classification of a particular film in six foreign countries. In the UK and Ireland, the film was classified 12A, which Mr Pace wrongly equates to a PG classification in Malta; a 12-year-old (unaccompanied by an adult) in Malta can enter the cinema and watch the film. In the UK and Ireland, the same 12-year-old had to be accompanied by an adult. In the USA, a PG13 classification means that a 13- (not a 12) -year-old may watch the film yet the classifier suggested parental guidance even for a 13-year-old. The point is that in these three countries, the classification was stricter than the classification in Malta. Mr Pace’s comment that in Malta “we take the parents by the hand and instruct them on what is good for their children” is uncalled for since if the board classifies a film in the PG category, the board is recommending parental guidance. One must consider that in most cases, a film is not previously viewed by a parent or parents and by classifying a film in this category, one is in fact leaving it up to the parents’ discretion on what is good or bad for their children.

Regarding the “pressure” of a distributor on members of the board, Mr Pace argues that “statistics show that this pressure is only in his (my) imagination, so much so that out of 29 blockbusters released so far this year, only four appeals were lodged… none of which obtained a U classification”. Whether or not this “pressure” is only in my imagination or not is difficult to prove, but Mr Pace’s argument only shows that the board is autonomous and does not submit to any pressure, from whatever source it originates.

Finally, Mr Pace believes that new categories of classification should be introduced. While I have my opinion on the matter, I do not believe that this is the right forum to express my ideas and opinions. Until the law is changed, there are five classifications and the board’s duty is to classify a particular film in one of these five categories and, once a classification is issued, the law must be observed.

J. P. Portelli

Board Member

Board of Film and Stage Classification

BIRKIRKARA