Banning a printed material usually entails the removal of the publication concerned from public attention and gaze with an underlying hope, held by the executor of the ban, that the particular publication - and the controversy and debate it generates - would eventually die out.

But herein lies the rub. In some cases, the ban imposed on a publication such as a newspaper only heightens curiosity in the controversy concerned. Its readership and the general public will not be able to indulge in intellectual exchange in that publication, but their yearning for information and exchange of ideas will persist, if not enhanced. At the very least, they will be forced to seek other avenues of public expression within the existing intellectual constraints in society.

The popularity of the recently banned, weekly tabloid Eksklusif owes partly to the fact that the spate of banning of publications in the recent past by the Home Ministry has left the general public, particularly Malay-speaking readers, with a reduced range of reading materials that are worth reading.

Malaysians have already witnessed the untimely "demise" of fairly critical and independent publications such as Detik and, later, Al-Wasilah , to name but a few, a disturbing phenomenon that spells a further contraction of democratic space for the ordinary people to legitimately express their views, criticism and dissent.

Another reason for the growing popularity of the few alternative publications such as Eksklusif is the availability of views from the opposition, non-governmental organisations, etc. in these publications, opinions or political stand that are normally shrugged off by the mainstream media.

These alternative publications also address pressing issues of public concern. As a result, more Malaysian readers, many of whom are by now media-savvy, have become appreciative of the value of having a wide range of opinions and ideas.

This hunger for alternative views, news and also intelligent analyses is also sparked by events following the hasty dismissal of Anwar Ibrahim as deputy prime minister and Umno deputy president. The unethical reporting of the mainstream media, particularly pertaining to the Anwar saga, and their consequent diminishing popularity, further boost the people's thirst for alternative media, including the Internet.

Double standards

The ban on Eksklusif by the Home Ministry must, therefore, be seen in this larger context. Its official justification for the ban, i.e. the tabloid's "unbalanced reporting" suggests the Ministry's deep concern for the tabloid's increasing popularity as well as its penchant for more reporting of the opposition.

Incidents such as that of Eksklusif also points to the unwillingness or inability of the powers that be to take cognisance of the fact that in a democracy, a publication has the right to choose its own political or ideological hue.

It is envisaged that other publications would help widen the political or ideological spectrum that exists in the media industry as well as in society by pursuing different political or ideological routes. There cannot be a monopoly of one political persuasion over the general populace in a society that expresses itself to be democratic.

This Eksklusif episode also strengthens public perception that the Home Ministry is not a disinterested party or institution when it comes to granting, or revoking, publishing permits and printing licences. A preference for a particular political viewpoint seems to colour the Ministry's judgment. Which is why the normal practice of the Home Ministry to decide on the "fate" of publications is viewed with grave concern.

There is also a dire need for legal recourse should the applicant feel that her/his application has been unfairly or arbitrarily rejected by the Home Minister.

Another severe implication of such a Home Ministry practice is that the uncertainty of publishing permit and printing licence disrupts the country's intellectual development. A possible closure of a serious and critical publication could translate into huge financial losses and debts that would only scare other potential publishers.

Even if it is true that Eksklusif had been unfair in its reporting by not giving "two sides of the coin", as claimed by the Home Ministry, then mainstream newspapers such as New Straits Times , Utusan Malaysia , Berita Harian , and The Star , should also be given similar harsh punishment. Oftentimes these mainstream newspapers have shown an inclination to resort to one-sided reporting, disregarding the right of the aggrieved to respond to accusations and wild assertions.

The media coverage of the last general election and of the Anwar trials, provide sufficient examples of the extent and kind of unethical and unfair reporting that was committed by the pro-establishment mainstream media. And, equally vital, a number of such unbalanced reporting could actually pose an ugly threat to ethnic harmony and political stability in Malaysia.

While we abhor any tendency on the part of the Home Ministry to practise double standards when it comes to the way it handles the unbalanced reporting of the mainstream media, we would rather that the Ministry issue a stern warning to publicly reprimand the mainstream media. To suggest a ban on these mainstream media would be barbaric indeed.

At the age of 43, the independent Malaysian nation should be secure enough to provide ample opportunity for its citizens to express responsibly their views and criticism, and also to dissent. To impose a licence tag on such a democratic right is to dishonour the integrity and dignity of the citizenry.