‘Dear Satan’ X-rating by MTRCB is ‘illegal, unconstitutional’

The ban on the public exhibition of the movie “Dear Satan” by the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board should be revoked for being “illegal and unconstitutional,” university professor Jose Mario de Vega said.

MTRCB chairperson Lala Sotto-Antonio earlier told a Senate hearing that the upcoming Paolo Contis-led film was given an X-rating as it “offended [her] as a Christian.” She further noted that the movie “has a different depiction of Satan becoming good.”

But while many have expressed support for the MTRCB decision and agreed with Sotto-Antonio, there were some who argued that the regulatory body had committed a violation of the a basic right to free expression enshrined in the constitution.

Among them was de Vega, a lecturer teaching Philosophy and Humanities in various universities such as the Polytechnic University of the Philippines, Unibersidad de Manila, and the National University of the Philippines

In an opinion piece furnished INQUIRER.net, de Vega said “Dear Satan” did not fall in any of the themes under Presidential Decree 1986, the law that created the MTRCB, that merited an X-rating, which is not deemed fit for public exhibition, therefore making the ban illegal.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Further and most importantly, the decision of the Head of the said agency is unconstitutional undeniably because it grievously violates that constitutional provision on the freedom of expression and the aesthetic freedom of our artists and intellectuals,” he said.

Article continues after this advertisement

De Vega claimed Sotto, as a public official, cannot invoke her religious beliefs in depriving others who do not share the same views and opinions as her.

He also underscored that even if the members of the regulatory board do not like the title of the film, their feelings should not interfere with their task as public servants.

“She and her so-called Board have no right to impose their ecclesiastical and religious beliefs on matters of statecraft. We all know that the separation of the state and the church shall be inviolable as clearly mandated by the fundamental law,” he added.

Under the MTRCB’s IRR, a motion picture may be banned if the following dominant themes are present:

• The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the dominant theme of the work as a whole appeals to prurient interest and satisfies only the craving for gratuitous sex and/or violence.
• The work depicts in a patently lewd, offensive, or demeaning manner, excretory functions and sexual conduct such as sexual intercourse, masturbation and exhibition of the genitals.
• The work clearly constitutes an attack against any race, creed or religion.
• The work condones or encourages the use of illegal drugs and substances.
• The work tends to undermine the faith and confidence of the people in their government and/or duly constituted authorities.
• The work glorifies criminals or condones crimes.
• The work is libelous or defamatory to the good name and reputation of any person, whether living or dead.
• The work may constitute contempt of court or of a quasi-judicial tribunal, or may pertain to matters which are sub-judice in nature.

Meanwhile, in the same Senate hearing, veteran filmmaker and Film Development Council of the Philippines chairperson Jose Javier Reyes explained that the movie was part of a Movie Workers’ Welfare Foundation (Mowelfund) workshop script about a little girl writing to Santa Claus but happened to misspell his name as Satan.

“And it was Satan who received her wish, her wish list for Christmas. So, Satan came to life and went to the little girl and was humanized by the little girl in the process… Satan was taught love by the little girl,” Reyes said.

Sotto-Antonio conceded that while the movie was not “demonic,” she said that having seen the movie for herself, it was a “depiction of Satan becoming good, Satan will never ever be good.”

The producers of the upcoming film announced last Aug. 23 that they would change the movie’s title to “better reflect its intended message,” following concerns about its potential impact on viewers.

They also apologized to viewers for causing “any offense or discomfort” with the title, saying it was not their intention “to hurt or disrespect anyone’s religious beliefs.”

View comments