9) issue four- Freedom of Speech: On Websites

Not all magazines added or changed to online publication due to the reasons stated in the previous post. There is a reason underlying it, which it is related to political issue. In the Malaysia context, the two websites named Harakah and Malaysiakini started off with a difficult situation because they are considered as pro-opposition and anti-government’s sites.

(Source: Harakahdaily.net 2009)

Harakah is a newspaper founded in 1987 and published by Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS). The circulation of Harakah broke new heights during the post- Anwar Ibrahim sacking by Tun Dr. Mahathir in the late 1990s. This has caused printing permit, which for years had allowed publication twice a week, to be changed to twice a month by the Barisan Nasional, the dominated government of Malaysia and finally they decided to go online at Harakahdaily.net

( Source: Malaysiakini 2009)

Malaysiakini, on the other hand was formed at the height of the Reformasi movement in 1999, the former Malaysia's Deputy Prime Minister Datok Seri Anwar Ibrahim had been arrested and virtually demonized by the mainstream media. There were active demonstrations on the street and a lot of people were looking for information that they weren't getting from the mainstream media. On the issue of Anwar, the media wasn't reporting in the manner they should. There was a lot of self-censorship and the only way for people to get information was from the Internet, from pro-Reformasi Web sites. Even so, there were a lot of rumors and unconfirmed news. So Malaysiakini was set up to quickly post news that was researched and investigated (Ho 2008).

The question is, does freedom of speech exist on internet?

The founder of Malaysiakini, Steven Gan said not really. The former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad pledged back in 1995 not to censor the Internet, because he wanted to attract investors to the new Multimedia Super Corridor. This pledge is the loophole Malaysiakini is exploiting (ZDNetAsia 2008).

However, things are not the same when Malaysiakini published a letter satirizing UMNO Youth in 2003, which did not amuse them and they made a police report under the Sedition Act 1948.
According to The Commissioner Of Law Revision (2006, p. 6), Sedition Act 1948 is “notwithstanding anything in subsection (1) an act, speech, words, publication or other thing shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that it has a tendency to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill will and enmity between different races or classes of the population of the Federation, if the act, speech, words, publication or other thing has not otherwise in fact a seditious tendency.”

In order to move forward, I think the government should not look at freedom of speech and the sensitive issues so seriously because if we were to avoid from discussing the sensitive issues, they will not be solved forever and remain as a problem to the country. What the government should do is discuss the issues openly with an open heart with its rakyat and find the best solution to overcome it. As a result, rakyat will pay more respect to the government and move forward together to achieve its mission and vision.

References:

1.Commissioner of Law Revision, 2006, Sedition Act 1984 Incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006, Commissioner Of Law Revision, Malaysia.

2.Ho, V, 2008, Malaysiakini: Sparing no effort for the truth, Singapore, viewed 16 November 2009, <http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/internet/0,39044908,62040225,00.htm>

3.ZDNet Asia 2001, Malaysiakini: Gov't may curb Internet, Singapore, viewed 16 November 2009, <http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/communications/0,39044192,23125203,00.htm>