Those arguing that the media should be kept on a tight leash often follow very much the same script. Any relaxation of the restrictive printing law, so they say, will lead to anarchy. And cutting the media loose will bring racial riots.

According to these apologists, media practitioners who clamour for press freedom are mere stooges of Western imperialism, or in the words of Information Ministry's parliamentary secretary Zainuddin Maidin, 'fake' journalists.

Conveniently forgotten is that more and more of our neighbours Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are embracing press freedom. And if they are indeed mentioned, it will be in the vein that these countries are beholden to the West.

So it was hardly surprising that Zainuddin, better known as Zam, and Deputy Home Minister Chor Chee Heung revisited these same themes at last week's press freedom workshop organised by Suhakam.

Both government representatives lamented, time and again, that press freedom would lead to social anarchy and a re-colonisation of our country.

Let this be made clear national security and social stability are not issues which journalists take lightly. After all, freedom comes with responsibility. The journalists' code of ethics and an independent press council will go some way in ensuring that press freedom would not be abused.

What worry us is that the government's clampdown on the media is not really to ensure national security or to prevent racial riots, but to keep the ruling parties in power, to shield politicians from public criticism, and to guard against any revelation of corruption.

Insurance policy

Examples of such an insurance policy against inquisitive journalists are too long to list. Perhaps this one would suffice.

Two months ago, state-owned RTM decided at the eleventh hour to scrap a TV feature on the controversial takeover of two Chinese-language newspapers by MCA.

The documentary was produced to coincide with the first anniversary of MCA's buyout of Nanyang Press publisher of Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press .

Apparently, the axed programme featured, among others, a number of media watchers and former Nanyang journalists discussing the impact of the takeover on the Chinese media.

RTM's TV2, during its May 30 Mandarin news bulletin, announced that the channel would begin airing the documentary in a three-part series starting June 1.

However, a phone call from a key politician resulted in the feature which was already in the final stage of edition ending up on the cutting floor.

Surely, airing the documentary does not jeopardise our national security. Nor will it create social anarchy. What has Zam and Chor got to say about this given that the politician who made the phone call came from Chor's political party, and that RTM is directly under Zam's watch?

Corruption probe

Similarly, the Official Secrets Act which was virulently opposed by journalists in 1988 when it was amended to include new tough measures is used to protect ruling politicians.

Only this week, Keadilan Youth chief Mohd Ezam Mohd Nor was sentenced to two years in jail for releasing documents on the corruption probe of two key politicians.

The documents contained recommendations to the government that International Trade and Industry Minister Rafidah Aziz and former Melaka chief minister Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik be charged in court for corrupt practices.

This followed a lengthy investigation by the Anti-Corruption Agency which found evidence of wrongdoing by the two.

The report ended up on Dr Mahathir Mohamad's desk. However, no action was taken against Rafidah and Rahim, both of whom are close to the prime minister.

But action was instead taken against Ezam for seeking to expose the truth. Indeed, the government did not challenge the authenticity of the documents when the case was brought to court.

How could Ezam's action in exposing the documents be "prejudicial to the safety or interests of Malaysia"?

Harder to defend

Which is why Suhakam is expected to recommend to Parliament for such laws to be revised. It is unlikely though for the government, given its track record, to accede to such requests. After all, Suhakam's recommendation last year for the government to respect the right of citizens to hold public rallies was blatantly ignored.

There is one consolation though. Both Zam, Chor and their ilks are finding it increasingly harder to defend their views. Journalists no longer accept them. Nor will Suhakam and a growing number of Malaysians.

The government claims that it is serious about combating corruption. Journalists are often told that their task is to help stem the rot. Instead, they find themselves in a dark room with a broom they can smell the stench and feel the grime.

But if we are really serious in rooting out corruption, someone should turn on the lights. Clearly, the restrictive press and secrecy laws contrary to what Chor and Zam had contended are there to ensure that journalists will not find the switch, and that Malaysians will remain in the dark.