Printing Press Act 1984 Case Study

1377 Words6 Pages
The Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984 was first introduced by the British colonial government as the Printing Ordinance of 1984 at the beginning of the state of emergency, this act was appeared in an emergency situation. During that time, the communist activities are seen as a threat, which is why The Printing Presses and Publication Act were introduced to fight against it. The Act required all newspaper and printing presses must granted by the Home Affairs Minister before they publish their printing material or publications, and the license must renew every year. (Cijmalaysia, 2015) The Printing Ordinance of 1948 was revised in 1971, because of race riots in 1969. This incident was happened in Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya in Malaysia, it will happened because of the results of the General election, the fight between Chinese and Malay groups, this is the most serious incident in Malaysian history that never happened in Malaysia before, there are 196 people were killed and over 350 people injured in 13 May and 31 July (Wix, 2015). After this incident happened, the government amended The Printing Ordinance to become the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA), this revision…show more content…
Karpal Singh argue that the words has other meaning in several dictionary, but the judge disagree with the statement state by Mr. Karpal Singh, he only prefer the meaning from Shorter Oxford English Dictionary which says that prison is ‘penjara’. The judge claimed that he was further explained in the court that the 16 year old girl was stay in protective custody with the agree of her father under S 8(4) a) of the Women and Girls Protection Act, it does not mean she was imprisoned (Cijmalaysia, 2015). But the pamphlet entitled seen as distort the original meaning of the words, intend to send wrong information of the judicial judgment to the
Open Document