Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy based on the principles of democracy. Having said that, the rules for governing the behavior and safety of its citizens has included several laws that mirror the freedoms of democracy with the addition of respect to the roles of the Monarchy. The form of Malaysian government and governance is more similar to Andorra than the populist practices and perception of United States of America from which many comparisons have been drawn.
For example, Malaysia’s oft argued ‘Freedom of Speech’, specifically in blogsphere, has witnessed the rise of said freedom’s misinterpretation.
Freedom of Speech and by extension freedom of information is an international human rights law that is enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCR), Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
The ICCR is a United Nations treaty based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, created on 16 December 1966 and entered into force on 23 March 1976. As of April 2009, Malaysia, Singapore, Unites Arab Emirates, Vatican City and 25 other countries has neither signed nor ratified their involvement in this treaty.
Another important condition to the “Freedom of Speech” and “Freedom of Information” is the existence of a caveat that states said freedoms are closely related to other rights, and may be limited when conflicting with other rights.
Specifically, as per our constitution, the Internal Security Act (ISA), the Sedition Act 1948 and Section 121b of the Penal Code as well as the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission Act (1998) and the Communications and Multimedia Act (1998), Cyberlaws, Electronic Government Activities Bill (2007) and Article 149(1). Pursuant to these acts is social regulation of which content regulation prohibits the expression, by whatever means, of offensive content.
The provision of Malaysian Law identifies offensive content as including the dissemination of seditious material and lies through any medium that can create discord, disharmony and chaos. This extends to ‘daulat’ and sensitive issues that include the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
Accordingly, Article 149(1) states that If an act of parliament recites that action has been taken or threatened by any substantial body of persons, whether inside or outside the Federation -
(a) to cause, or to cause a substantial number of citizens to fear, organised violence against persons or property; or
(b) to excite disaffection against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or any Government in the Federation; or
(c) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or other classes of the population likely to cause violence; or
(d) to procure the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of anything by law established; or
(e) which is prejudicial to the maintenance or the functioning of any supply or service to the public or any class of the public in the Federation or any part thereof; or
(f) which is prejudicial to public order in, or the security of, the Federation
or any part thereof, any provision of that law designed to stop or prevent that action is valid. People who infringe on these laws, just like any other law, will be subjected to enforcement accordingly.
The extension of this Social Regulation into cyberspace is some three years old. In 2007, Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz had been quoted as wanting bloggers to be responsible. In 2008, prior to his investure as Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Abdul Razak was quoted that while the government has been tolerant of anti-government positions and criticisms on the Internet, it is very concerned about statements that insult religion and reek of racism. In 2009, Information, Communications and Culture Minister Dato’ Seri Utama Dr. Rais Yatim acknowledged the emerging importance of blogging as a powerful influencer and social communication medium.
Bloggers are not independent 'islands of opinion’ who voice out their thoughts to empty space, but rather people with far flung impact and a wide circle of supporters. As powerful influencers, he asked bloggers to find inroads toward Malaysians' communal success.
Dato’ Seri Utama has many times reminded bloggers to be sensitive when commenting on issues to preserve the country’s peace and stability. He said that the Internet is used as an information and education medium and as such bloggers should utilize the Internet responsibly.
Bloggers and their work are accountable to the acts and laws of the Malaysian Constitution. Instead of inciting unrest, distrust and disunity, bloggers have a communal and social responsibility to communicate values and uphold tenets of nation building. Just like responsible journalism, there must also be responsible blogging.
Responsible blogging then calls for writing opinions that could borrow from the Society of Professional Journalists’ (SPJ) Code of Ethics.
According to SPJ’s code, public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist, or blogger, is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. This then enables the public to be served with thoroughness and honesty that is the platform for professional integrity and forms the basis of a journalist's and blogger’s credibility.
Bloggers are encouraged to write responsibly such that there should be a reporting of true accounts; not constructed for sensationalization sake, not seditious, not disparaging with intent to harm another in whatever way and reports ought to be just.
So, “Freedom of Speech” is really freedom to be responsible in disseminating information that is honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information. Proponents must treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect. They are also accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other. How many proponents actually comply with this set of tenets that is derived from United States of America, the land of the so-called “free”?
When put into center stage, the American “freedoms” are not entirely free. If Malaysia mimics the American Law in its entirety, then the first call to be responsible bloggers is less harsh and more tolerant than the history of Americans blogging.
The call for responsible reporting is exactly in line with SJP’s code of ethics and it has components of the international standards of human rights to “Freedom of Speech”. The rights should not be questioned, because it is already in place and in practice with more tolerance than exhibited by most other countries.
To be completely free is to invite anarchy and chaos. The underlying factor in the freedoms eschewed by many is that democracy is still a governing body with its own set of rules, regulations and laws. The sentiments pursuant to freedoms within the context of the Malaysian flavor of democracy have been developed in line with what Malaysian Law and our constitution seeks to uphold, protect and provide for the benefit of Malaysians.
No comments:
Post a Comment