South African Group Seeks to Quash Launch of Adult TV Channels

LOS ANGELES—According to its site, "The Justice Alliance of South Africa (JASA) is a coalition of corporations, individuals and churches committed to upholding and fighting for justice and the highest moral standards in South African society." It's probably not a surprise then that the group came out yesterday against last year's decision by regulator Icasa to allow "TopTV [to] finally launch three adult satellite channels—Playboy TV, Desire TV and Private Spice—between the hours of 8 p.m. and 5 a.m. only," AVN reported at the time, Yesterday, JASA said it is not only opposed to the channels, but it also officially registered that opposition in November when it filed paper with the High Court in Cape Town challenging Icasa's ruling. “Jasa believes that it is a step too far to introduce pornography to the family TV, which is usually in the only living room in the home,” said the group in a statement. “Inevitably children will be aware of it, even if parents attempt to prevent them watching. The 8pm watershed period is absurd because teenage children settle down to watch TV at that time after doing their homework.” Considering South Africa's relative conservatism regarding the proliferation of pornography, TopTV insists it has already made substantial concessions in order to improve security on the channels to ensure that minors do not access them. According to The Citizen, "Top TV said the pornographic channels would be a separate package for subscribers, which required a separate monthly subscription, age verification, and other security features, such as a secure pin code." The measures were intended to "ensure that only viewers who willingly subscribed to the channels had access to the pornography channels." The efforts are insufficient for JASA, however, which said of its filed complaint, "As advised by counsel, Jasa alleged that Icasa erred in law in failing to find that the constitutional rights of children were laws of general application, which should have trumped the rights to freedom of expression." It also contends that Icasa is obliged "to consider the moral and spiritual implications of TV channels," and failed in that task by approving the channels.