The news broke out in Chechnya. From June 1st, 2024 onwards it will be impossible for the inhabitants to listen to musical pieces whose rhythm do not surpass 80, or exceed 116 BPM, declared Musa Dadavev, Minister of Culture. On pain of conviction, the pieces judged too slow or too fast will have to disappear or be recomposed “to conform to the Chechen mentality” and the “cultural heritage of the Chechen people”. The musical genres involved mostly are Occidental, such as techno or pop, considered decadents. This new law comforts the idea of a repressive regime in a region where folkloric music constitutes a big part of the culture. The government uses that argument to maintain “hegemony through the imposition of a purported 'traditional' version of Islam, which falsely claims to defend local belief and culture.”
This violation of freedom takes back to a larger constraining machinery crossing borders and time: censorship in the music industry.
Is music political?
Freedom of speech, as enshrined in the 11th article of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights adopted in 2000, guarantees everyone the right to receive or communicate information, ideas and works, without any interference from public authorities. Yet, censorship in the music industry still continues to erect barriers to freedom of artistic expression around the world.
Music is prominently political. Artists pay its price on a daily basis. In 2019, nine artists died for their art and seventy-one were imprisoned for having expressed criticism in their songs, reveals a 2020 report made by Freemuse.
European songs are the proof of the existing control over music. In 1977, the year of Queen Elizabeth’s Silver Jubilee, the song “God save the Queen” by the Sex Pistols was banned by the BBC and radio for being anti-royalist. The title referring to the national anthem of the United Kingdom, some lyrics were considered unacceptable and shocking by the British society, such as “she is not a human being” or the accusations regarding a “fascist regime”.
Can censorship be justified?
Freedom of expression is a fundamental principle of modern democracies. But does it have a limit? For Germany, the answer is yes. In the German Fundamental law, freedom of expression can be “abused” to defend “constitutional and democratic order”. Thus, the State has the responsibility to fight abusive uses of the freedom of expression, in particular regarding Nazi references.
In fact, the fight against Nazi symbols also applies to music. Any person singing or listening to one of the numerous Nazi propaganda songs is liable to be punished by the law. Amongst them are the National Socialist German Workers' Party, Hitler Youth or the Sturmabteilung (“Assault Division”) songs. The melody itself can lead to be condemned for propagation or adhering to the Nazi ideology. However, the Constitutional Court confirmed that Nazi Germany’s national anthem is not to be forbidden by the law. Why? The current German national anthem is composed of the third stanza of the song “Das Deutschlandlied”, whose first stanza is… Nazi Germany’s national anthem.
The limit of freedom of speech seems to be arbitrary. Should we condemn Nazi songs while making an exception for the Hitlerian anthem, defined as “artistic freedom”? The debate opposing absolute freedom of expression and the necessity of a legal framework remains.
By Nina Thevenet
To go further on our May file dedicated to music, you can read our Society and International Relations sections’ articles on our blog.
Follow MINERVIEWS
