Patterns and Key Issues in Artistic Censorship, with main focus on the MENA region.

In December 2025, Mimeta published about 40 Memos and among them documented 22 cases of artistic censorship, mainly with a focus on the MENA region. The data reveals a global architecture of cultural control that operates through multiple, converging mechanisms: state security apparatus, religious and moral policing, informal pressure systems, legal and procedural barriers, and institutional governance tools.

Key findings:

State actors are responsible for 68% of cases; non-state actors (armed groups, conservative movements, platform companies) and mixed actors account for 32%
Middle East concentration: 73% of cases occur in or relate to Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Palestine/Israel, and North Africa, reflecting acute pressures in conflict-affected and authoritarian contexts
Content and space suppression dominates outcomes (50% of cases), alongside legal threats (23%), physical restrictions (18%), and other forms
Morality and religious enforcement emerge as primary justifications, deployed particularly against women, sexual minorities, and critical religious representation
Informal censorship — verbal bans, unwritten threats, procedural obstruction — is increasingly used to avoid legal challenges and documentation
Democratic erosion: Artistic suppression extends to established democracies through school censorship (US: 22,810 book bans), institutional governance restrictions (UK), and conservative mobilisation (Austria)

Part 1: Who Is Censoring? State Dominance with Variations by Region

In 15 of 22 cases, state institutions—courts, security forces, ministries, censorship boards, school systems—directly execute or mandate censorship.

Middle East: State Security and Religious Authority Fusion

In Syria, Iraq, Egypt and Iran, state actors often work in conjunction with religious authorities or deploy religious/moral language to justify censorship.

Syria: Literary censorship committee demands editorial changes; Ministry of Religious Endowments evicts Al‑Kindi Cinema; intelligence-linked actors block distribution of novels; university faculty ban nude models in art classes
Iraq: Courts impose prison sentences under "immoral content" provisions; National Security forces raid venues; Interior Ministry coordinates with "morality" monitoring committees
Egypt: Syndicates use professional licensing to enforce moral codes; state censorship board makes verbal bans; Al‑Azhar delivers religious vetoes over broadcast content
Iran: Intelligence Department arrests musicians on national security grounds after cross-border cultural collaboration

This fusion shows that in conflict-affected Middle Eastern states, artistic control is treated as a security function, with morality and religion invoked to legitimise repression.

Non-State and Para-State Actors

In 7 cases, non-state actors drive censorship, often with tacit state tolerance:

Armed groups in Syria and Iraq: Omar Khairy abducted by Syrian National Army-affiliated fighters; Basra fashion show threatened by militias
Religious-political movements: Austrian TFP organization and allied groups mount petition and prayer campaigns against critical religious art in Vienna
Conservative constituencies: Moroccan lawyers and religious figures prosecute rappers; Tunisian online activists accuse filmmakers of blasphemy

These cases illustrate how state indifference or passive support allows non-state actors to function as de facto cultural police, especially where formal institutions are weak or conflict-ridden.

Institutional and Governance Actors

In 5 cases, censorship operates through professional bodies, cultural institutions and schools—spaces typically considered less obviously "state":

Professional syndicates: Egyptian Musicians' and Actors' Syndicates suspend and ban performers based on contractual disputes framed as moral or professional violations
Arts institution boards and trustees: UK arts organisations restrict Palestinian programming via governance tools and "risk" language
Festival bodies and ministries: IFFK denied exemptions for 19 films by India's Ministry of Information and Broadcasting; state censorship board in Egypt makes verbal bans
School systems: US school boards have enacted 22,810 book bans across 45 states in a single year, targeting works on race, gender, sexuality and LGBTQ+ topics

This demonstrates that censorship increasingly operates through structural and procedural mechanisms that avoid overt legal controversy while achieving systematic exclusion.

Part 2: The Justifications: Morality, Religion and Social Order

12 of 22 cases (55%) invoke morality, religion, or social order as the primary or stated justification for censorship.

Religious Offence and Blasphemy Language

Tunisia's Pomme d'amour removed from Artify following accusations that the film is an "intolerable offence to God and religion"
Austria's Künstlerhaus exhibition attacked as "blasphemous" by conservative Catholic organizations; artists targeted for depicting Christian symbols in feminist/queer contexts
Egypt's The Atheist subjected to boycott campaigns and a high-profile lawsuit claiming it "undermines the foundations of Islam" and promotes atheism
Egypt's Muawiya religious drama banned via Al-Azhar fatwa over concerns about representation of religious figures

These cases show that religious establishments and conservative movements have not merely rhetorical power—they have legal veto capacity (Al-Azhar), litigation capacity (Mortada Mansour's lawsuit), and platform power (Artify's removal decision).

"Public Morals" and Decency

Iraq prosecutes online performer Joanna Al Aseel under "public morals" provisions for digital content deemed indecent
Iraq sentences singer Taysir al-Iraqiya (in absentia) to one year for "immoral online content"
Iraq raids and detains staff at Mosul café over a viral video of women dancing, framing it as a breach of social order
Basra fashion show targeted as "immoral and foreign-influenced"
Damascus University threatens zero grades for art students displaying nude models, invoking "moral and social values"

These prosecutions target women, gender expression, and sexuality disproportionately, revealing how "public morals" laws function as instruments of patriarchal control.

National Security and Geopolitical Framing

6 of 22 cases (27%) are justified using national security, extremism, or anti-terror language.

Iran: Kurdish violinist Nima Mandoumi arrested and held incommunicado after performing in Armenia with Israeli musicians; intelligence characterises cross-border artistic collaboration as "cooperation" with an enemy state
Palestine/Israel: Al-Hakawati children's theatre raided, with authorities alleging "links to Palestinian Authority" despite the event's international donor backing and licensed status
Syria: Literary censorship framed as correcting "distortions" of conflict narratives rather than as political suppression
Iraq: Novel A Year of Decline blocked from bookstores and fairs via verbal security directives without court proceedings

In these cases, cultural collaboration and dissent are securitised: a concert becomes espionage, a children's musical becomes a security breach, a novel becomes a narrative threat.

Procedural and Risk Language in Democracies

In the US, UK, India, and Austria, censorship is justified through procedural, administrative, and risk-management language rather than explicit bans:

US school boards: 22,810 book bans justified via policies claiming to "protect" children from "inappropriate" content on race, gender, sexuality and identity
UK arts trustees: Palestinian programming downgraded or moved to closed formats via "risk assessment", "reputational concerns", and "funding anxieties"
India's Ministry: 19 films denied festival exemptions without stated grounds, relying on administrative discretion
Vienna's Künstlerhaus: no formal ban exists, yet artist Deborah Sengl's future exhibitions are cancelled and she receives harassment following conservative campaigns

This procedural language obscures ideology: "risk", "appropriateness", "exemption denial" and "governance review" avoid accusations of censorship while achieving the same effect.

Part 3: What Happens to Artists? Physical Harm and Enforced Disappearance

4 cases involve arrest, detention, abduction, or physical abuse:

Nima Mandoumi (Iran): Arrested by Intelligence Department, held incommunicado for 2+ weeks; no formal charges disclosed; family denied information on his whereabouts or condition
Joanna Al Aseel (Iraq): Sentenced to three months imprisonment for digital content
Taysir al-Iraqiya (Iraq): Sentenced to one year in absentia for online performance
Omar Khairy (Syria): Abducted by armed group, beaten, forced to perform under duress

These cases inflict direct harm to bodies and liberty, with enforced disappearance (Mandoumi) representing one of the most severe human rights violations in international law.

Bans, Closures and Content Removal

11 cases result in event closures, content removal, screening bans, or space seizure:

Venues and Events

Al-Hakawati Theatre (East Jerusalem): Raided, children's performance halted mid-show, audience evacuated
Mosul café: Closed after viral dancing video; staff detained
Al-Kindi Cinema (Damascus): Historic venue evicted by Ministry of Religious Endowments
Styria comedy collective: Festival shows cancelled in Hama after warnings about surveillance
Basra fashion show: Threatened and informally shut down

Content Removal

Pomme d'amour (Tunisia): Removed from streaming platform Artify
Better than Earth (Egypt): Verbally denied public screening permit
Muawiya (Egypt): Banned from broadcast on Egyptian television
19 films (IFFK, India): Denied festival exemptions

Longer-Term Bans

Khalil Sweileh novel (The Barbarians' Paradise, Syria): Publication blocked unless author accepts censorship committee's edits removing conflict references and changing the title
A Year of Decline (Iraq): Informal ban from bookstores and fairs without court order
Haifa Wehbe (Egypt, initially): 16-month suspension and ban of work permits, later overturned by court

Legal Threats and Procedural Obstruction

5 cases involve prosecution, litigation, or regulatory action without (yet) resulting in incarceration:

Egypt's The Atheist: Lawsuit by prominent lawyer Mortada Mansour demanding state withdrawal of valid screening licence; State Commissioners Authority initially recommended revocation; film delayed for 16 months before court affirmed right to screen
Moroccan rapper Pause Flow: Criminal prosecution under insult laws; bail set at high amount pending trial
Haifa Wehbe: 16-month legal battle and syndicate proceedings before Administrative Court overturned ban
Styria comedy: Informal pressure and self-imposed cancellation rather than formal legal action

These cases show how legal processes themselves function as censorship mechanisms: uncertainty, delay, and the threat of prosecution create chilling effects even where cases are eventually overturned.

Structural and Career Impacts

Several cases reveal long-term, systemic impacts on artistic careers and institutional autonomy:

Deborah Sengl (Austria): Following TFP campaign, at least one planned institutional exhibition was cancelled; artist subject to ongoing harassment
Palestinian art in UK institutions: Programming moved to closed, private formats; public-facing opportunities restricted via trustee governance
Moroccan and Iraqi women artists: Disproportionately targeted for "immoral" or "indecent" work; careers threatened by viral outrage and moral campaigns
Syrian and Iraqi novelists: Distribution networks disrupted; bookstore and fair access blocked informally

These impacts are often invisible in formal statistics but deeply shape which stories get told, which artists can work safely, and which narratives remain silenced.

Part 4: The Mechanics of Informal Censorship: Verbal Bans and Unwritten Directives

7 cases involve censorship without formal legal documentation:

Syria's comedy collective warned that "every word is being scrutinized and reports are being filed" — no written ban issued
Iraq's novel A Year of Decline blocked from fairs and bookstores via "verbal security instructions"
Egypt's Better than Earth denied screening permit verbally at festival; only private jury screening allowed
Basra fashion show threatened by militia; event informally called off
UK arts organisations cite "risk" and "governance" reasons for programming cuts without formal policy documents

Why informal? Unwritten censorship avoids appellable documentation, complicates legal challenges, and creates plausible deniability. Artists and institutions self-censor in response to ambiguous threats and warnings.

Surveillance and Denunciation Networks

Multiple cases reveal how surveillance and public denunciation function as censorship tools:

Syria: Styria's statement that "reports are being filed" on every word suggests networks of informants and monitors
Iraq: "Immoral content" campaigns operate through online reporting platforms and audience denunciations
Tunisia: Pomme d'amour backlash mobilised through social media; casting members harassed
Austria: TFP mounted "prayer" rallies outside museum and publicised targeted works to mobilise outrage
US: School board decisions follow parent complaints and coordinated book-banning campaigns

These mechanisms distribute censorship responsibility across state and society, making it harder to identify who "made the decision" and creating social pressure that substitutes for formal enforcement.

Part 5: Geographic and Thematic Concentration: The Middle East Crisis

16 of 22 cases (73%) occur in Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Iran, Palestine/Israel, or involve Middle Eastern artists:

This reflects:

Active conflict zones (Palestine/Israel, Syria, Iraq) where artistic gathering itself is treated as a security matter
Authoritarian state consolidation (Egypt, Syria, Iran) using culture as a domain of control
Religious establishment power (Al-Azhar in Egypt; militia enforcement in Iraq; intelligence security framing in Iran)
Economic collapse and militarization (Iraq, Syria) creating conditions for armed group intervention

The Middle East dominance does not mean censorship is confined to the region—but it does show where pressures are most acute and mechanisms most integrated into state/security infrastructure.

Democratic Backsliding

3 cases in established democracies (US, UK, Austria) show concerning patterns:

US: 22,810 school book bans in a single year targeting works on race, gender, sexuality and LGBTQ+ topics — a mass policy-driven suppression of controversial narratives
UK: Arts institution trustees use "risk governance" to restrict Palestinian art and curatorial autonomy — institutional structural suppression
Austria: Conservative religious movements mobilise petitions, prayer rallies, and harassment campaigns against critical religious art — organised social pressure as censorship

These cases warn that artistic freedom is not guaranteed in democracies and can be eroded through institutional, procedural and organised civil-society pressure rather than formal bans.

Part 6: Targeted Communities: Women and Gender

Women artists face disproportionate morality-focused scrutiny, particularly when their work or public presence challenges patriarchal norms:

Iraq: Women staff at Mosul café targeted for dancing; female fashion models in Basra targeted for "immorality"
Haifa Wehbe: Suspended and banned partly on moral grounds; international artist vulnerable to syndicate discipline
Tunisia: Pomme d'amour cast members, including actresses, subjected to harassment following religious accusations
Syria: Students threatened with zero grades for displaying nude models in art school; women's bodies treated as inherent moral threat
Austria: TFP campaign singled out reinterpretation of Virgin Mary as "transgender figure" as particularly offensive

LGBTQ+ and Sexual Minorities

Austria: Exhibition featuring queer reinterpretations of Christian symbols targeted; artist Deborah Sengl's works on gender and sexuality singled out
US school bans: 22,810 book removals disproportionately target LGBTQ+ narratives, gender identity discussions, and sexuality education materials

Religious and Ethnic Minorities

Kurds in Iran: Nima Mandoumi arrested partly on grounds of ethnic identity and cross-border Kurdish cultural networking
Palestinians in Israel: Al-Hakawati raid; systematic restrictions on Palestinian art in UK institutions
Atheists and freethinkers in Egypt: The Atheist and other religiously critical works face coordinated boycotts and litigation

Part 7: Convergence of Mechanisms

The December cases reveal how multiple censorship mechanisms converge and reinforce each other:

Example 1: Egypt's Ecosystem of Control

The Atheist film faced:

Prior regulatory approval (censorship board licence) — apparently not protective
Social media campaigns and religious mobilisation (boycott calls)
Strategic litigation (Mortada Mansour's lawsuit)
State actor hesitation (Commissioners Authority report recommending revocation, then courts overturning that)
Informal delay (16-month postponement)
Chilling effects on producers, distributors and future projects

Result: Even when court affirmed the right to screen, the ecosystem had already suppressed the film's impact, delayed release, and warned other filmmakers of the risks.

Example 2: Iraq's Multi-Layer Suppression

Iraqi artists face:

Laws and provisions ("immoral content", "public morals", "Content Monitoring Committee")
Armed group threats and militia enforcement (Basra fashion show, Mosul café)
National Security directives (informal bans on novel distribution)
Online reporting platforms (moral content denunciation systems)
Vocal religious constituencies (defamation of public morals)

Result: A dense architecture where state, armed groups, religious actors and public surveillance converge to suppress cultural expression.

Example 3: US Institutional Suppression

American book bans operate via:

School board policy decisions responding to parent complaints
State-level laws enabling or mandating book removal
Conservative organised campaigns (e.g., targeting LGBTQ+ narratives)
Administrative processes that remove books without public debate
"Appropriateness" language that obscures ideological selection

Result: 22,810 individual suppressions that collectively reshape what young people can read, know and imagine — a form of mass cultural control that avoids the appearance of state censorship.

Part 8: Key Findings Summary

1. State Actors Dominate (68% of Cases)

Governments, security forces, courts, and state institutions directly execute 15 of 22 December cases. Even in democratic contexts, state education systems drive mass book bans.

2. Middle East Concentration (73% of Cases)

Acute pressures in conflict-affected and authoritarian contexts; intersection of security, religious authority, and economic collapse creating multiple vectors of control.

3. Morality and Religion as Primary Justifications (55% of Cases)

Religious establishments, conservative movements, and "public morals" provisions provide ideological cover for suppression, often targeting women, sexual minorities, and religious minorities.

4. Informal Censorship on the Rise

Verbal bans, unwritten directives, surveillance networks, and procedural obstruction allow censorship to operate without legal documentation, complicating redress and creating pervasive self-censorship.

5. Content/Space Suppression Dominates (50% of Cases)

Bans, closures, evictions, and content removal are the most common outcomes, alongside longer-term structural suppression of opportunities and networks.

6. Gendered Vulnerability

Women artists face disproportionate moral scrutiny, particularly when their work challenges patriarchal norms or sexual conservatism.

7. Democratic Erosion

Artistic suppression extends to established democracies through school systems (US), institutional governance (UK), and organised conservative campaigns (Austria), challenging assumptions about democratic protection of expression.

8. Convergence and Integration

Censorship mechanisms (legal, security, religious, institutional, social) increasingly reinforce each other, creating dense architectures of control that operate at multiple levels simultaneously.

Recommendations

For Mimeta and artistic freedom advocates:

Document informal mechanisms — verbal bans, unwritten directives, surveillance networks—which are hardest to track but increasingly central to censorship
Support cross-border artistic collaboration and solidarity with at-risk artists, particularly Kurds, Palestinians, women, and LGBTQ+ creators
Monitor democratic backsliding in established democracies, particularly school censorship (US), institutional suppression (UK), and conservative mobilisation (Austria)
Strengthen legal defence networks for artists facing prosecution, syndicate bans, and strategic litigation
Amplify cases of overturned bans (like The Atheist, Haifa Wehbe) as precedents for artistic freedom and due process
Challenge "risk" and "governance" language that obscures ideology in institutional decision-making
Support documentation of gendered and intersectional targeting of women, LGBTQ+, and minority artists

For policymakers and international bodies:

Investigate and report on state-sponsored artistic censorship, including security-framing of cultural collaboration
Strengthen protections for cross-border artistic exchange, particularly in conflict regions
Challenge "morality" and "blasphemy" language as tools of patriarchal and religious control
Examine school book banning as a form of mass cultural suppression
Support institutional transparency on programming decisions and trustee governance affecting minority representation

Conclusion

December 2025 confirms that artistic censorship is not a marginal or declining issue. Rather, it is deepening, diversifying, and integrating across state, security, religious, institutional, and social domains.

From the children's theatre raid in East Jerusalem to the 22,810 school book bans in America, from the enforced disappearance of a Kurdish violinist in Iran to the quiet structural restriction of Palestinian art in UK museums, the December cases reveal a global system in which cultural expression is increasingly managed, monitored, and suppressed.

Defending artistic freedom requires sustained attention to:

Hard repression in conflict zones and authoritarian states
Soft suppression through institutional governance, procedural obstruction, and risk language in democracies
Informal mechanisms that operate without legal documentation
Intersectional vulnerabilities of women, minorities, and politically marginalized artists
Integration of mechanisms that reinforce each other across state, religious, institutional and social actors

Only through systematic documentation, cross-regional solidarity, and unwavering commitment to the principle that artistic freedom is essential to democratic and human dignity can the tide of suppression be challenged.

Mimeta
Center for Culture and Development
Arendal, Norway

December 2025

Read the Novemeber 2025 report here!

Source: https://www.mimeta.org/mimeta-news-on-cens...

Mimeta December 2025 Report