IGM, PEN Malta voice solidarity for Andrew Azzopardi after 'absurd' BA decision

The Institute of Maltese Journalists (IGM) expressed its solidarity with Andrew Azzopardi and RTK103 after being fined from the Broadcasting Authority.

In a statement, the IGM disagreed with the BA’s decision regarding a complaint made by Imperium Europa and Norman Lowell.

The IGM asserts that Azzopardi's comments about Norman Lowell being a racist and xenophobic were based on facts derived from court judgments. The presenter had the right to express his views, especially considering the information was backed by legal outcomes.

The IGM acknowledges the station's editorial discretion in choosing guests for its programmes. Azzopardi's stance on not inviting individuals with racist views aligns with freedom of speech and editorial control.

The IGM recognised the importance of the right of reply, as stipulated by the Media and Defamation Act. However, in this case, the presenter's arguments were grounded in court judgments, and there was no obligation for Lowell to be heard necessarily. The station still extended the right of reply, but an agreement was not reached.

The IGM stated that if Lowell felt defamed, seeking redress in court would have been the appropriate course of action, rather than involving the BA. The decision by the Authority, acting as both accuser and judge, was seen as an unusual and potentially problematic precedent.

The IGM raised concerns about the impartiality of the Broadcasting Authority's board, particularly highlighting the past affiliation of the secretary, Dr. Adriano Spiteri, with Imperium Europa. 

On this note, the institute expressed concern about the appointment process of the Authority's board, emphasising that nominations solely depend on the two parties represented in the parliament. This raises questions about the independence and neutrality of the board.

The institute’s concern is that such a decision sets a precedent where individuals who believe they have been treated unfairly may seek satisfaction from the Authority. 

PEN Malta reacts

The IGM's statement came on the same day as PEN Malta spoke about the case, as they described the BA’s fine is nothing short of an egregious display of absurdity and an assault on the presenter's freedom of speech.

“Penalising a station for rejecting a purveyor of hate speech and racial animosity like Norman Lowell is a slap in the face to common decency and journalistic integrity,” the NGO said.

It said racism should never be legitimised as a political view, “and the authority's failure to recognise this is shameful.”

READ ALSO: Broadcasting Authority's fine to RTK is a threat to free speech, NGOs say

“It was the Maltese courts that found Lowell guilty of inciting hatred and therefore, presenter Andrew Azzopardi’s term was not used frivolously or as an insult. But irrespective of that, Azzopardi has the fundamental right to free speech in declaring himself against hosting a Nazi sympathiser on his programme and cannot be penalised for saying so,” PEN Malta said.

They said the decision is a shameful testament to the Broadcasting Authority's irrelevance and moral bankruptcy, saying it has now set a worrying precedent for Maltese broadcasters.

“This spineless move exposes the institution's blatant detachment from contemporary values and its alarming lack of commitment to combating hate,” PEN Malta said.

RTK reaction

In their reaction, RTK also described the fine as a threat to freedom of expression. They argue that Andrew Azzopardi expressed an opinion grounded in facts, and the BA's decision sets a dangerous precedent for media in Malta. 

RTK contended that the BA's decision indirectly defends Norman Lowell, who has a criminal conviction for inciting racial hatred. The irony is highlighted, as the Authority, in the past, fined other stations for broadcasting Lowell's racist views. The stance against racism in the media is reiterated.

Meanwhile, RTK host Andrew Azzopardi is appealing for funds to support the program and potentially pursue further legal action. The goal is to defend two fundamental principles: the right not to be discriminated against based on race or ethnicity and the right to freedom of expression.

In their statement, RTK called for a review of the constitutional role of the BA, "before it becomes a circus authority which endangers the fundamental principles it ought to defend."