A question of law

Some more in relation to the jailing of a man in America last month for possessing manga porn featuring sex with children. At the same time - in a motion proposed in February this year - the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly aimed to pass a law prohibiting such images within Tokyo (with the hope that it would go nationwide - otherwise any manga made in Osaka, for example, wouldn't be effected).

After organised complaints from manga artists (and not only ones who draw pornography, reported here in the Asahi Shimbun which also mentions public opinion within Japan) the debate on the bill has been delayed. There was initially intended to be a vote on Friday, but it didn't happen - instead deliberations will be continued. Japanese pop-culture analyser Roland Kelts has an article here in the Daily Yomiuri. A question around the issue was raised by a journalist from the audience at the end of a seminar about otaku held on Thursday night in Tokyo (where Roland and three others were speaking) - so it's becoming a talking point.

A main problem with such a law is of where the line - about depictions of sexual activity and "nonexistent minors" - would be drawn. Whatever your feelings about such illustrations, the law is there to define the legal and illegal while imagination can often be a decidedly grey area. This means, according to those protesting, that legitimate manga could be subject to self-imposed restrictions in fear of prosecution (leaving aside any argument about whether drawings are only a step up from thought - which we don't police - rather than a step toward action). The Japan Federation of Publishing Workers' Unions, put it like this: "Excessive self-restraint will be conducted (by artists) in creative activities. As a result, creative expressions will wither."

So, would such a restriction limit imaginations which shouldn't be fettered, whichever direction they go in? Or is the restriction needed?