We represent journalists who are working to raise professional standards and ethics, and to lobby for removal of restrictions on media operations in Malaysia.

On World Press Freedom Day in May 1999 and May 2000, a total of 951 journalists supported a two-part signature campaign to petition Home Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for a repeal of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984. He agreed to consider our case.

In the memorandum, the journalists proposed setting up an independent alternative mechanism that would allow checks and balances on the media. Recently, the Malaysian Press Institute sponsored a draft bill to set up a Media Council governed by an Act of Parliament. There was no widespread consultation with journalists and the MPI has since declined to discuss the contents of the proposal, which has been submitted to the Home Ministry.

We categorically reject statutory control of the media in an environment where other institutions of democracy are hampered from playing a robust role in checking abuse of power. Instead, we reiterate support for an independent and impartial self-regulating mechanism  helmed by persons of integrity  that wins the respect and confidence of the public, government and the media itself.

Indeed, to date, the Ministry has taken no step toward repeal of the Printing Presses and Publications Act. Instead, statements issued in 2001 have created the impression that the Act may be tightened to further control licensing conditions. This is alarming, for it will further erode the medias ability to deliver information and act as a watchdog of the public interest.

In conjunction with World Press Freedom Day 2002, we urge the Human Rights Commission to intervene in creating an enabling environment for media freedom. This is consistent with provisions in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on freedom of expression and the right to information.

Constraints on the media

1. Media operations are severely curtailed by restrictive legislation, licensing requirements and discretionary administrative powers, which deter scrutiny of political and corporate decisions that affect the public interest.

These include the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, Broadcasting Act 1988, Official Secrets Act 1972, Internal Security Act 1960, Sedition Act 1949 (revised 1969), the General Orders and Administrative Guidelines for the civil service

Informal practice abets the legal position. Politicians, their aides and certain government officials take it upon themselves to reinforce the official line by frequently instructing newsroom managers on what to publish. This amounts to intimidation, especially when accompanied by covert or overt threats linked to the annual publication or printing permit.

2. Ownership of the print media is controlled through an annual licensing provision under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, which explicitly provides for revocation or suspension of the licence without judicial review.

Such legislation is anachronistic at a time when even less economically developed countries have put in place a legally backed framework for a free media, to enable citizens to obtain a plurality of views. In this respect, Malaysia compares unfavourably with progressive neighbours in the region like the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia.

3. Since May 2001, corporate mergers or acquisitions have seen additional muzzles put on national dailies like Nanyang Siang Pau and The Sun , which had attempted to walk an independent editorial line. Again, the problem can be traced to selective issuance of publishing licences to those who support the political and corporate elite in Malaysia.

4. Since July 2000, several defamation suits against the media have sought an excessive quantum in damages. This properly drew the concern of the Chief Justice of Malaya Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah in March 2001, who said huge awards would curb press freedom. We urge the Commission to monitor any judgment or award that seeks to stifle the media and to issue statement should this occur.

5. Given these obstacles, journalists have had to tread carefully and practise self-censorship to avoid displeasing the government, publishers and unsympathetic editors. They otherwise risk being placed in cold storage, suspended or dismissed for perceived infringements.

Not surprisingly, the number of courageous editors and journalists has declined as many leave the profession on principle or succumb to a stifling work culture. This has affected the quality and relevance of information being placed in the public domain. In turn, citizens have lost confidence in the media and have become cynical about participating in executive and legislative processes.

In a functioning democracy, citizens participate in policy-making processes. Except in matters deemed prejudicial to national security, public order and morality (which should be clearly defined by law), Malaysians have the right to receive accurate, timely, and balanced information. This is necessary for them to make informed decisions and provide constructive opinions on matters of public interest. However, those unable to tolerate criticism routinely restrict the release of meaningful information and are able to avoid being held to account for it.

Freedom of expression

Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right that is guaranteed to citizens  albeit conditionally  by Article 10(a) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. Yet, public space for such expression has shrunk drastically due to measures that restrict the media and reflect official intolerance of dissenting opinion:

  • In 1987, three newspapers lost their publishing licence for purportedly critical coverage of issues of the day.

  • In 2000, three magazines  Detik, Al-Wasilah and Exclusif  were ordered to close due to the nature of their political content.

  • In May 2001, Nanyang Siang Pau (together with the China Press ) changed hands controversially over the objections of its editorial staff and members of the Chinese community who feared erosion of editorial independence. The move added a third newspaper to the investment arm of the Malaysian Chinese Association, which already has majority interest in The Star . Umno representatives, meanwhile, sit on the board of Utusan Malaysia . The publishers of the remaining newspapers are aligned with the ruling coalition.

    • We must point out that even a hint of involvement or influence of political parties in editorial decisions can lead to suspicion of biased coverage and skewed reports. In Malaysia, the line is often crossed, in particular during the run-up to party and general elections.

  • Relatively independent news coverage in The Sun was neutralised from December 2001. The owner sought to placate the prime minister and his deputy with a public apology after publication of a report that revealed a foiled assassination plot against the two leaders. At staff meetings in the days after the story was published, a member of the board of directors cited potential revocation of the newspapers annual publishing and printing permits to impose stringent curbs on editorial policy, coverage and placement of stories, and content of news reports.

    • This is proof that the licensing clause in the Printing Presses and Publications Act can be misused to serve any agenda. It is also among instances that form the basis of complaints that 12 former Sun editorial and support staff, which were lodged with the Commission on March 4, 2002.

    Protection of journalists

    It is of deep concern to us that journalists find it more difficult to work in a professional manner. Issues of public interest are being taken out of newspapers only because the information brings discomfort to those with political and economic influence. In recent instances, journalists have been penalised or intimidated merely for reporting issues of public interest. They have had no recourse to protection against arbitrary, unjust and unfair actions.

  • In December 2001, two journalists of The Sun were suspended by the board of directors  over the objections of editors  for their part in exposing an assassination plot against the prime minister and his deputy. Several other journalists and editors were summoned to the police headquarters several times over a number of days to answer questions on editorial operations and source of the news. The prime minister claimed the report would taint the countrys image abroad, a fear that has not been borne out.

  • In January 2002, malaysiakini reported that two journalists from an English-language daily had been rapped for their aggressive style of questioning and fearless coverage of the by-election in Indera Kayangan, Perlis. One journalist was said to have been sent back to the newspapers headquarters in Kuala Lumpur because his news coverage had irked Barisan Nasional state election campaign director and Perlis Menteri Besar Shahidan Kassim.

  • In March 2002, the New Straits Times published a picture on its front-page to illustrate sedimentation in piped-water supply in parts of the Klang Valley, despite being filtered. The Prime Minister condemned the newspaper for the report, rather than order investigation of a situation that has been worrying citizens. Again, he alluded to such reports creating a negative image of the country. What next? To avoid offending those in power, editors would now simply avoid coverage of similar situations.

  • In March 2002, journalists from the Internet newspaper malaysiakini and Web radio RadiqRadio were denied access to the Press gallery in Parliament to cover the proceedings, on the basis that they had not been accredited by the Information Ministry. For Parliament to make such a decision flies in the face of democratic practice, to which the media makes a crucial contribution.

  • The Information Ministry continues to withhold accreditation of colleagues working in the Internet medium because they are not part of the traditional media. The stance is as outdated as it is ignorant of the journalists role and functions. It is also in conflict with legal provisions that guarantee there will be no censorship of information on the Internet. In the first place, information can only be made available if the journalists concerned do not encounter official barriers to news gathering.

    • A workshop between the media and representatives of civil society organisations on March 9, 2002, revealed consensus that journalists are entitled to protection in the line of duty, as they are the voice of citizens. All forms of protection would be incumbent upon reports being produced in fair and ethical manner.

    They recommended that the Government should:

  • Repeal laws that restrict media operations and expose journalists to sanctions;

  • Provide for independent judicial review of administrative decisions relating to the media; and

  • Extend public space for expression of citizens views, including dissenting opinion.

    • The participants were from the English, Chinese and Malay-language print or Internet media; trade unions; environmental, consumer, social reform and human rights groups; political parties; citizens associations; and an academic association.

    They suggested that a fresh approach be made to the Human Rights Commission to facilitate reform. Since the Commission was formed in April 2000, various stakeholders have voiced their dissatisfaction with the lack of media freedom. Two years on, the Commission has yet to respond to these concerns.

    We, therefore, ask the Commission to immediately state what it has been doing to secure freedom of expression and the right to information for Malaysians, as well as to openly declare its position on a free media in Malaysia.

    Toward an informed democracy

    In the interests of building an informed democracy in Malaysia, we call upon the Human Rights Commission's law reform committee to recommend that the Government:

    1. Amends the Federal Constitution to provide an unconditional guarantee of the right to freedom of speech and expression.

    2. Passes freedom of information legislation.

    3. Rejects legislation that could be used to suppress freedom of speech and freedom of the media.

    4. Rejects or repeals legislation to license media, journalists and presses.

    5. Repeals criminal defamation laws so that the media and citizens are no longer subjected to punitive controls that curb freedom of expression.

    6. Rejects or repeals laws that empower the state to censure or punish citizens, political opponents and the media for partisan reasons.

    These principles were endorsed by the Commonwealth Parliament Associations (CPA) second conference on Parliament and the Media held in Cape Town, South Africa, from April 14-18, 2002. As a CPA member, the Malaysian Parliament is morally bound to uphold the values and benchmarks set by its colleagues in the Commonwealth, as well as to consider proposals from the Human Rights Commission, which it created.

    In this regard, too, we call the Commissions attention to the Malaysian governments renewed commitment to upholding freedom of expression, as stated in The Coolum Declaration issued by the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in March 2002, in Brisbane, Australia.

    The Declaration is preceded by the statement: &..we, the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth of Nations, renew our enduring commitment to the values and principles which we share. We stand united in our commitment to democracy, the rule of law, good governance, freedom of expression and the protection of human rights. (emphasis ours)

    We call upon the Human Rights Commission to:

    1. Disclose full details of the achievements of its law reform committee to date;

    2. Expedite recommendations toward repeal of all legislation, rules, policies and official decisions inimical to freedom of expression and the right to information; and

    3. Strongly advise the government to dismantle all other obstacles that deny citizens and the media access to these fundamental human rights.

    The above memorandum was presented to the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) on Press Freedom Day on May 3 by Inisiatif Wartawan, a group of concerned journalists from the traditional and new media. The memo is endorsed by Wami (Writers Action for Media Independent), CAT (Committee Against Takeover of Nanyang Press by MCA), and Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ).