Seizure of sex products shows illegal activities unchecked


A recent confiscation of sex accessories by the Office of Censorship is an example of many indecent activities happening and not monitored by relevant authorities.
Chief Censor Steven Mala said more awareness needed to be done in communities.
“Following the publication of the confiscation of sex enhancement products by the enforcement and compliance officers, there has been ongoing debate from the public on issues such as pornography, penalty fines, awareness on the Act on illegal materials/publications and ignorance of relevant laws,” Mala said.
“These issues have provided an opportunity for the Office of Censorship to understand the need for more awareness to help the people understand the roles and functions of the office.
“The recent confiscation is an example of the many indecent activities that are in operation without being monitored by the Office of Censorship and other agencies such as police and Customs.
“The particular Act that stirred up the discussion is found in Section 71 of the Classification of Publication (Censorship) Act 1989, Subsection 1(a) — a person who has in his possession an objectionable publication, other than a prescribed publication, is guilty of an offence punishable, (b) in the case of an individual– by a fine not exceeding K1000 or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or both.
“Though such activities are not monitored, it does not mean that they are legal, it implies that the enforcement agencies lacks sufficient funding to effectively police these areas and require continuous government support to maintain such operations on a daily basis.
“Since most of these activities have been transformed into this digital era, this is another issue to discuss in which the Office of Censorship does not have the necessary monitoring system to control what is being shared online on the internet or on any social media platforms for that matter.”