Freedom Of Speech In Malaysia

953 Words4 Pages
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter”(George Washington). George Washington quote on freedom of speech is extremely true and powerful because that is what is happening today. Freedom of speech has been seen and heard from many people around the world, through media channels or newspaper. People stand on freedom speech because they want a change in their world and mostly those changes are for good reasons. Nowadays freedom of speech can be seen a lot in this 21st century but there were many people facing consequences if they speak up the truth. Let us travel back to the year 1735 where freedom of speech was even not applicable in that time. New York distributer John Peter Zenger…show more content…
Zenger is guarded by Andrew Hamilton and vindicated. His trial builds up the rule that truth is a barrier to criticism and that a jury may figure out if a production is defamatory or dissident. In Malaysia, Article 10 of the Constitution of Malaysia ensure Malaysian residents the privilege to speak freely, an opportunity of get together and flexibility of affiliation. Article 10 also qualifies subjects for such flexibilities as are not limited by the legislature, rather than totally ensuring those opportunities. As years pass by, freedom of speech in Malaysia is going down and many people are facing consequences by that. Freedom of speech in Malaysia does not exist.
First and foremost, Malaysia constitution has a special article which is Article 153. Article 153 is a special article because it allows the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to protect the positions of the Malays and native people in the states of Sabah and Sarawak. Article 153 is not only unfair to the people of non-malays because they could not question and go against the Article 153. Where has the freedom of speech gone?
…show more content…
“The Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 is also closely related to the publishing world. The purpose of this act is to control all types of publications, whether printed in the country or imported from abroad”(UUM PRESS 2015). This PPPA was quite controversial and a debate to begin with because freedom of expression and freedom of speech was limited for the printing presses and newspaper company. Those sector was restricted from writing true stories and telling the truth to the public because they could not touch any matter regarding political stuff and manipulating news to the public. If the media sector and newspaper company did not follow those rules, the Home Affair Minister has the right to suspend the permit and refuse an application for a permit for newspaper and printing presses. On the other hand, Home Affair Minister can suspend the permit if any publication risk national security or create social conflict. The Minister has obviously restricted freedom of expression and also freedom of speech. The public always wants to know the truth and the first principle of journalism is truth and accuracy. Why do the Minister wanted to restrict from writing news regarding politics? These days, any news stories that the Minister feels that are sensitive to them, they will accuse the innocent people to put in jail or fine them. For instance, in the year 2015, three editors were arrested
Open Document