On May 3 last year, some 50 journalists submitted a 'State of the Media' report to the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam), calling for the repeal of the repressive Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) in conjunction with World Press Freedom Day.

Fast-forward o­ne year later, the Malaysian media is no better off - press freedom seems to be as elusive as ever to journalists who advocate the right of free flow of information through a free media.

In fact, last Friday - just o­ne day before this year's World Press Freedom Day - Harakah editor Zulkifli Sulong pleaded guilty to a charge of sedition and was fined the maximum of RM5,000.

Malaysiakini , meanwhile, is still under a police probe over a purportedly seditious letter that it published in January.

These are just two examples of how the law can stand in the way of notions of achieving a free and ethical media in Malaysia.

Media Council

Media organisations here have long downplayed issues because of their fear of legal repercussions and the potential denial of publishing and printing permits by the government.

Suhakam commissioner Prof Hamdan Adnan - when accepting the journalists' memorandum last year - assured them of the commission's commitment to finding ways to expand press freedom.

He proposed that the media and Suhakam set up a special committee to promote press freedom and monitor related violations.

Suhakam has, however, organised o­nly o­ne workshop between then and now to discuss the issue. At the workshop last August, representatives of the government, media and non-governmental organisations agreed o­n the need for press freedom and the right to information.

So what can advocates do to fight for a freer media in Malaysia? There are those who see a positive role in the functions of an independent and impartial media council as a self-regulatory mechanism.

Between 1999 and 2000, a two-part campaign obtained signatures from 951 journalists to back a memorandum to the home ministry, calling for repeal of the PPPA. In return, the signatories proposed self-regulation of the media.

A self-regulated media council could be the answer, not just to defend but also to promote press freedom. Unfortunately, the speed with which even the framework for this body is being prepared indicates that there is still some way to go before it is realised.

Early anxieties

There is a niggling worry that the government may hijack the media council, defeating the idea of self-regulation of the media industry.

This is largely based o­n statements by government ministers that the new council will be set up as part of new PPPA mechanisms.

Another complaint is that journalists are not actively involved in the setting up of the council, and that they will not be adequately represented when the body is eventually constituted.

National Union of Journalists (NUJ) chairperson Norila Mohd Daud pointed out that journalists have o­nly a limited role in the proposed council and that the union would o­nly have o­ne seat out of the available 24 in the body.

She said she found this alarming, saying that it does not reflect the "importance of the union being the o­nly body protecting the welfare of journalists".

However these two concerns were laid to rest during a conference organised by the NUJ last Friday in conjunction with World Press Freedom Day.

At the event, Prof Mohd Safar Hasim of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, who helped draft the proposed Media Council Act , said the government's involvement would be limited to the drafting and passing the legislation.

This appears to indicate that the council will be an independent entity, and not entrenched within the PPPA.

Safar also said journalists would be asked to help run the council.

Advocates wary

Despite such assurances, advocates of press freedom remain wary of the council's intentions and role. There are several reasons for their uneasiness.

For o­ne, discussion of the proposed media council is still at an embryonic stage. According to Safar, the council is o­nly expected to be formed in about four years' time. That's a long time for things to change - or not.

Furthermore, the process of creating the framework of the council has been left in the hands of the Malaysian Press Institute (MPI), whose membership is made up established media outlets.

The MPI's draft law proposes a media council, but without repealing the PPPA. Its idea is to create a semi-governmental body that will have additional powers to control the media.

This has fuelled fears that the proposed media council will be made to work to the advantage of media owners and not to that of journalists.

In addition, representatives of the alternative media - including independent and opposition web sites and publications - have not been invited by the MPI to participate in framing the scope of the media council's scope of work.

The drafters, therefore, do not have any feedback from this sector of the Malaysian media.

Even more alarming is the thought that the council will then be used to regulate the o­nline alternative media when the PPPA itself does not have any provision to control Internet content

Zam's standards

Then there are the pronouncements of government officials like Deputy Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin. He openly said last Friday that Malaysians should not celebrate World Press Freedom Day as it o­nly reflects the agenda of western media imperialism.

Such statements are reflective of his stand o­n the matter. What is there to say that he will not impose his own standards o­n the media council, despite his claims that this body will not be forced o­n journalists?

This is precisely why many civil society groups and independent media groups have argued for the formation of a truly independent media council. These groups argue that it can be achieved, with the participation of civil society and independent media representatives in the council.

It is still not too late for the MPI to invite these groups into the discussions so that an environment can be created where Malaysians can be truly proud of the media situation.

Of course, for this to happen, there must be government support for an independent council. It must realise that a body with broad representation can take care of its own backyard, both in disciplining unprofessional practitioners and in promoting press freedom.

This will eventually result in the irrelevance of various laws that repress the media at present.

At the same time, Suhakam must play its role in ensuring that freedom of expression is unhindered. It must start with the special committee that Hamdan proposed last year and ensure that everyone is represented in it.

Advocates are not so na V ve as to expect all this to happen soon, but share a wish to see wider representation by the next World Press Freedom Day in the discussions surrounding the proposed media council.

That would be a good start.