The raids on the publishers, printers and distributors of a number of publications deemed pro-opposition and pro-reformasi, such as Haraki, were the latest of a spate of raids that were conducted by officials from the all-powerful Ministry of Home Affairs in the last few months. These swoops, to be sure, are the physical expression of the full weight of the restrictive and mighty Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA).

As reported, the officials mounted these raids on the grounds that the publications concerned were published without the necessary permits as stipulated by the PPPA. Victims of these raids, on the other hand, pleaded that they had no other options but to publish in a somewhat "hindered" manner after having their permit applications rejected by the Home Ministry. It is noteworthy that these raids also bring into focus the question of whether the confiscation of printed materials that were published on an irregular basis was legitimate.

Insofar as regular publication without permit goes, and therefore illegal, the Home Ministry officials are on the right side of the law (as it is now), but they're standing on a lower moral ground. For the PPPA is an unjust and undemocratic piece of legislation that prevents the inalienable right of citizens to freely express and exchange views, and share information. Needless to say, human compassion and prudence were apparently lacking in this episode.

At the risk of belabouring a familiar point, the freedom to express one's opinion in a living democracy is not a privilege bestowed upon by the political masters. It is a right that must be respected by all and sundry for only then can we hold our heads high in a community of civilised nations. Of course, this right to express should go in tandem with responsibility.

Which is why the brute force of the PPPA can only be perceived as a vulgar reaction of the government of the day towards a civilised and peaceful endeavour to invite and encourage intellectual exchange via the written word.

Furthermore, delaying indefinitely a publication's permit application, as was the case with a few publishers recently, on the part of the Home Ministry is tantamount to political harassment as such a delay has dire consequences upon the publishers and printers in terms of finance, business planning, loans arrangements, etc. It certainly has that [#1] Killing me softly[/#] (May 9) effect.

What's equally appalling is that rejection of permit application is normally not accompanied by justification or explanation, as it's not required by the PPPA. Again, such a legal provision only reveals the discretionary powers that the Home Minister wields. And to top it all, the minister's decision is final and unchallengeable in any court of law. So do we really need to wonder why many of the so-called pro-opposition publishers do not easily get their permit application approved speedily, or approved at all?

The political bias of the Home Ministry in matters pertaining to permit application also shows the government's inability or refusal to acknowledge that in a democracy, an individual or a group doesn't necessarily have to have an opinion similar to the government's. In other words, to dissent in a peaceful, and also intellectual, manner is a right that should be honoured.

This brings to mind a letter that predictably gained centrestage in yesterday's (May 11) New Straits Times ' Letters' Column. In a letter entitled, "Nothing like a good dose of reading the mainstream media", the writer, a certain "Amir Firdaus Khan", declared publicly - and rather unabashedly, if I may add - that he still preferred the mainstream newspapers to alternative websites such as malaysiakini for reasons that are debatable.

For one thing, no one would, or should, quibble over his liking for speeches of ministers and proceedings of general assemblies of the dominant parties in the ruling coalition, which many of the mainstream newspapers dutifully report. That is to say that his preference (his justification notwithstanding) should be respected, but at the same time he and others of similar wavelength (like the Home Ministry) should likewise respect selections of others which are dissimilar to theirs. To each his/her own, as they say.

While the display of raw power (of the Home Ministry officials) may have the desired effect of creating a culture of fear among publishers, printers and distributors in general, it nonetheless cannot conceal the incapacity of the powers-that-be to address criticisms and certain pressing issues of the day. Brain and brawn may not necessarily sit nicely together especially in an age where reason and reasoning should reign supreme. Besides, given the fact that Islam is the country's official religion, shouldn't the ruling elite ponder over religiously the significance of the Quranic term, Iqraq (read)?

Given the recent developments in the local media industry, one would like to assume that the grave injustice that the PPPA has brought about has moved many in the industry, such as the Editors' Association of Chinese Medium of Malaysia, to call for the repeal of the law. And this, in turn, provokes us to wonder whether there are other groups, whose professional activities are related to intellectual development, writing, and expression of ideas that concern society, would come to the fore as well.

What is also striking about these raids is that they seemed to be targeting at publications written in the national language. There are a number of ways of reading this: One, to reduce the number of reading materials, particularly those critical of the government, so that reformasi-prone readers will be deprived of useful information and incisive analyses regarding our society as a whole.

Two, which is the consequence of the first, to lessen the contact between the Malay-speaking crowd and the critical publications and their writers.

Three, to hinder the spread of sympathy and support for Anwar Ibrahim particularly within the Malay community.

Four, which may be stretching things a little bit, to dampen the growth of the national language for it is in times such as this that a language would be used in the most creative fashion.

And fifth, an incurable aversion to anything critical of the government of the day.

Finally, the raids under the auspices of the PPPA not only mean the confiscation of materials and documents from the premises concerned; they also indicate a lost moral mooring.