|
Kano Censorship And The Burden Of Moral Defence By Muhammad A. Muhammad
Not many people were aware of the fact that the Kano state Censorship Board was in existence since the Kwankwaso administration. This was largely because the board’s leadership, which was inherited by Shekarau, was as passive as any irresponsible and/or incongruous leadership could be. But when the charismatic Mal. Rabo Abdulkareem was wisely appointed as the executive secretary (now Director General) by Mallam as a result of the infamous Hiyana saga, the name of the Kano state censorship Board became a household name. Censorship is the supervision and control of the information and ideas that are circulated among the people within a society. In the contemporary times, censorship refers to the examination of books, periodicals, plays, films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other communication media for the purpose of altering or blocking out parts thought to be objectionable or offensive. The objectionable material may be considered immoral or obscene, heretical or blasphemous, seditious or treasonable, or injurious to the national security. Tasked with the burden of control and supervision of the information and ideas that are circulated in the society, the activities of the Kano state Censorship Board have already started impacting favorably and this is appreciated by the public. All of a sudden, the public happily realized that the previously otiose board can now really defend their helplessly invaded morality. The hitherto unprecedented expansion and circulation of immorality via the activities of the so called Kannywood or Hausa filmmakers was perfectly checked and stopped by the Rabo led censorship to the admiration and pleasure of the public. The shameless and destructive activities of the filmmakers were thriving to the chagrin of the society to the extent that some pessimists have given up. All the pleas, calls and sermons by different groups of people to the filmmakers, to effect corrections in their activities as well as their films, were sternly rebuffed by the filmmakers. This is the reason for the euphoria that trailed Rabo’s bold move to tackle the disturbing activities of the filmmakers which was thankfully successful. Today not only the unwholesome activities of the filmmakers and its unwanted results were checked successfully, the filmmakers themselves have finally, and quite pleasantly, seen wisdom and broke a truce with the board to respect the religion, culture and the morality of their audience. The recent rumpus that trailed the rightly decision of the board to censor the more dangerously obscene books, that filled our society and caused so many disturbing incidences, was a clear testimony that the censorship board is living up to the expectation of the public. It was the erudite Dr. Ibrahim Malumfashi who first, as far as I know, drew attention to the adverse effects of the so called Kano market books some years back when a debate ensued, between him and the relatively neophyte bookshelf editor the popular weekly trust Newspaper, over an epitaph on the legendary Abubakar imam by the intellectual. It is quite surprising the way some of the writers chose to confront the board in a Kannywood-like manner. Even the hitherto respected among them inanely wrote many things that put their integrity to question. They sound and behave as worst as any lawless uneducated could. while the board is saying that all forms of obscenity should be stopped and that the books should conform with the culture and religion of the targeted audience in addition to the registration of the writers with the board among other things, these people are busy writing different sorts of bunkum in order to blackmail the board. All their arguments were based on subaudition, or more correctly, assumptions, and nothing more. Some of them were even proposing to take the matter up to their masters i.e. the international community in order to come to their aid, just as their Kannywood cohorts tried, as if the so called international community is that rotten. It even surprisingly appears that these people never knew, or choose to forget, that censorship and the ideology supporting it go back to ancient times. Every society has had customs, taboos, or laws by which speech, play, dress, religious observance, and sexual expression were regulated. Various government policies across the world provided for the strict suppression of obscene publications. The test, as developed in Britain and substantially followed in the U.S., was whether the publication “tended ... to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences.” The law was invoked against works of recognized merit as well as against pornographic publications. Successful prosecutions were common, as were seizures of books by post office, customs, and police officials. The Greek philosopher, Plato (428?-347 bc), believed that art should be subservient to morality; art that could not be used to inculcate moral principles should be banned. In the ideal state outlined in The Republic, censors would prohibit mothers and nurses from relating tales considered bad or evil; and in his Laws Plato proposed that wrong beliefs about God or the hereafter be treated as crimes and that formal machinery be set up to suppress heresy. (Baird, Robert M. "Plato." Microsoft Student 2008 [DVD]. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Corporation, 2007) Some of the writers were obviously prodded by either ignorance or by some behind-the-scene hypocrites who were not happy with the board’s handling of the filmmakers as it affects their lucrative (but harmful) business of lewd publications. It is painful that those who are expected to represent us via their God given art choose to misrepresent us, and worst, they see nothing wrong in that. Anybody conversant with the trash which the censorship board was trying to ameliorate will be surprised at the reaction of the writers. Anyway this is not an attempt to resuscitate the already rested debate as the board and the writers have found a common ground to work together to the appreciation of all. It is one’s hope that the mutual understanding, existing between the board and the writers, will metamorphose into a solid partnership in progress. Another area which the Censorship made and is still making tremendous achievement is that of curbing the freely circulation and/or selling (and buying) of pornographic materials such as nude posters, porn books and magazines, porn films and related materials. This abominable act of freely circulating porn materials under whatever disguise has been among the most disturbing phenomenon to every moral adult, and nobody seems ready to stop it until the revolutionized censorship confronted it. Prior to the censorship’s positive activities, you stand the risk of inadvertently seeing extremely harsh nudity that will make you silly with embarrassment whenever you visit a newspaper stand. Now that things are thankfully getting better, the board should brace up for the preservation of the development and beam its search light on similar vices bedeviling the already desecrated society. Muhammad A. Muhammad Sagagi quarters, Kano State. |