Freedom of Speech and Expression in Journalism

Freedom of Speech and Expression and Journalism
Problems faced in the industry, and the solutions and guidelines to the problem.
A report done by Ooi K.L Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman

*Note: This is an undergraduate individual assignment report. It might not be the best report, yet it is still referable for other undergraduates who are doing the same subject area. ** This assignment was done for the subject UAMG 3063 - Communication Law in the third year of Degree in Public Relations under the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman

Freedom of Speech and Expression and Journalism Journalism is a difficult profession in Malaysia and they face impediments peculiar to the society (Radhakrishnan 2010). Radhakrishnan says in his report that journalish has an honorable objective which is the circulation and dissemination of information including news, comment and opinion as well as entertainment. He also states that journalists should be borne in mind that in order to enjoy to status of a profession, the practitioners are expected at all times to conduct themselves in an ethical manner upholding the best tradition of the profession The role of journalism in a democratic society needs special mention. It is a necessary and essential prerequisite for democracy to survive. It acts as the fourth estate and it is also the essential watchdog over the conduct of the government (Radhakrishnan 2010). However, most journalists face many legal issues when reporting news to the public. One of the legal issues which is very important in the journalism industry is the freedom of speech and expression as described in Article 10(a) of the Federal Constitution, that every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression. In Malaysia, freedom of speech is not absolute. There are more than 30 other laws which restrict the freedom of speech and expression in journalism. The most known in the industry are the laws pertaining to sedition, defamation, contempt of court and official secrets (Whither the Malaysian Press? 2010). The journalists, in addition, have to contend with a number of other restrictions. Among them are: The Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, Broadcasting Act 1988, Official Secrets Act 1972, Sedition Act 1948, and Internal Security Act 1960 (Freedom of Speech and Expression in Malaysia 2006).

What Freedom of Speech and Expression has in Journalism Freedom of speech and expression has quite a huge impact in the journalism industry. It means controlling the flow of news and also having to mean disseminating accurate and fair news from the press to the public. Although Article 10 of the Constitution stats that everyone has the right to freedom of speech, there are still restrictions to follow on what should and should not be published in the media. The press serves as a watch dog in the media in order to let the public know what is happening in the country by reporting news. Sometimes, what the journalist writes or publish in the newspaper might get them into serious trouble. An example of this happens in 1994 when a newspaper editor maliciously published false news that can cause riots in the country. The editor named Pung Chen Choon reported false news about Roman Catholic priests who were caught under the Internal Security Act 1960. Pung was arrested because the news he published was categorized as a sensitive issue because it can create discrimination from the public towards those who are religiously Roman Catholic. As what stated in Section 8(a)(1) of the Printing Press and Publications Act (PPPA), any publication there is maliciously published any false news, the printer, publisher, editor and the writer thereof shall be guilty of an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for a term no exceeding three years or to a fine not exceeding twenty thousand ringgit or to both. From the above, we can see that press freedom does not mean that a journalist or editor can simply publish any false or malicious news to the public. As a journalist, it is important for them to report news fair and accurate, without any intention to enact any misunderstanding from the public. Publishing false news is a crime, but publishing false

and malicious news is even worst as it has seditious tendency and that would make the public has discrimination towards certain religion, which in the end create disharmony among the Malaysian citizen. Another example of freedom of speech in the media happened in 1975 when Fan Yew Teng was detained under the Sedition Act for publishing a copy of type-written speech which she received from Dr. Ooi Kee Saik. The speech by Dr Ooi talks about the sensitive issues which involved criticizing the Bumis in the country. Although it was the speech itself that has seditious tendency and what Fan did was just re-publishing it without any alteration to the original copy, yet she was still being accused of sedition. From the above matter, it seems quite unfair to a journalist who was just doing her job of reporting accurate news to the public. However, Fan should know better that the type-written copy of speech is very seditious and that she should not have published it in the newspaper because this can create riot in the country. This has somehow become a conflict between doing her job and obeying the law because when she did what she did, she was arrested. If she did not publish the speech, the public will not know about what happened and this also contradicts her job as a reporter because her job requires her to publish fair and accurate news.

Solution and Guidelines To have freedom of speech and expression in the media industry, the government should let the journalists practice free press in the correct matter, which is to always publish the fair and accurate news but not malicious false news. The government should only detain those journalists who publish false and malicious news but not those who are trying to report on what exactly happened. In the case of Pung, it is understood that he deserves to be arrested under his own behavior of disseminating false news to the public that could harm the peacefulness in the country. This is to show that disseminating malicious news is a crime that should be avoided at all times from the journalism industry as no one should try to break the harmony among the citizen. It can be argued that the Press has a greater influence and impact on public consciousness than almost any other single activity. It has been known to make and break governments. Even to start riots (New Straits Times 29.1.1985). However, in Fan’s case, the court should not hold her under Sedition Act because the speech was not written by her but by Dr Ooi who had written and also gave the speech himself during a dinner. A journalist is responsible for telling the fair and accurate news and Fan is just doing her job by reporting what was spoken by Dr Ooi during the dinner. Her action has no malice but its truth reporting. The government should have a more linear side to journalists who are reporting what really happened although it might be sensitive news. This is because the public are not passive receivers. They tend to seek the truth from whatever media and they will know that the sensitive issue does not come from the journalist but from whoever created

the malice. Journalists on the other hand, need to follow the law by not reporting any false and malicious news to the pubic because this definitely is not a way to help strengthen the relationship between different ethnics in this multi racial country. In a nutshell, both government and the journalism industry must practice free press in a way that will not enact public misunderstanding towards any individuals or groups. Truthful news reporting should be allowed and the news which can harm the harmony of the country should be banned because if the government restricts the reporting of truthful news, the public will not be able to know exactly what happened and all the news in the media will not be of public interest but only what the government wants us to know, thus creating a big contradiction in the democratic country that we live in.

References "Freedom of Speech and Expression in Malaysia." NECF Malaysia. March 15, 2006. http://www.necf.org.my/newsmaster.cfm?&menuid=12&action=view&retrieveid =706 (accessed July 2, 2010). Radhakrishnan, S. JOURNALISM AND LAW. Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, January 28, 2010.

Sonia Randhawa, Pauline Puah, Susan Loone. Freedom of Expression and the Media in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: SUARAM, 2005.

Whither the Malaysian Press? May 16, 2010. http://www.mysinchew.com/node/39022 (accessed July 30, 2010).

References: "Freedom of Speech and Expression in Malaysia." NECF Malaysia. March 15, 2006. http://www.necf.org.my/newsmaster.cfm?&menuid=12&action=view&retrieveid =706 (accessed July 2, 2010). Radhakrishnan, S. JOURNALISM AND LAW. Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, January 28, 2010. Sonia Randhawa, Pauline Puah, Susan Loone. Freedom of Expression and the Media in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: SUARAM, 2005. Whither the Malaysian Press? May 16, 2010. http://www.mysinchew.com/node/39022 (accessed July 30, 2010).