Big Guys Says No To Racial Remarks
Whether we agree or not with Peter Tan's decision in bringing 'Goodman' to the face of justice, the Sedition Act is indeed part of the Malaysian Law. Many bloggers have been betting on whether any actions will be taken on this matter. We already have a clue now, as reported in today's today's The Star newspaper.
PETALING JAYA: No racial remarks please, we're Malaysians.But anyone who insists on making them, through publications or websites, be prepared to face the law.
"We will not tolerate messages that can cause disharmony in the country."
"Stern action will be taken against those who try to create hostility in the country," said Deputy Internal Security Minister Chia Kwang Chye.
He said existing laws such as the Sedition Act and Multimedia and Communication Act would be used against those who post such remarks on the Internet.
Chia was commenting on the case of three young Singaporeans charged under the Sedition Act with posting inflammatory racial remarks online in Singapore recently.
Deputy Information Minister Datuk Zainuddin Maidin said his ministry would report to the authority of anyone making racial remarks.
"We are monitoring the Internet and if we find any report which will threaten racial harmony, we will report it to the Energy, Water and Communications Ministry," he said.
Zainuddin said the Government would not allow any racial remarks made in any form such as speeches, publications or the Internet.
Local websites have generally toed the racial harmony line with the use of self-censorship before the messages get to the public.
In 2003, however, the Malaysiakini office was raided by police investigating an alleged seditious letter posted on the news website following a report lodged by Umno Youth.
It's about time we go through our blog archives and edit where neccessary,
Comments
Time for some more controversial blogs to 'go underground'... :P
Quick, password protect your blog entries, moderate all comments, require registration to your blogsite before comments are allowed, and remove your site from Google's radars (yes you can). Bah humbug.
Posted by: totoro | September 20, 2005 05:51 PM
Someone should report the various UMNO Youth websites to the authorities (go read through the forums/comments if you haven't already). But then again I bet nothing will be done against them.
Posted by: Lee Wye Jon | September 20, 2005 06:35 PM
Be very careful, you may be accused of making false accusations of sedition.
Which raises the question... how do you know if what you say is seditious or illegal or not? Now, this is not a rhetorical question. I shall give you an example.
In Malaysia, it is illegal to preach Christianity or any other religion to a Muslim.
What then, is the legal position if in a blog, it is clear that non-Muslim Malaysians are obviously preaching (or talking enthusiastically about) their religion to people who are obviously Muslim Malaysians? (ie, with interaction, questions, replies, etc). What is the legal position if these people involved include non-Malaysian Muslims? What if some participants are non-Muslims who are making only incidental comments? Can they too, be said to be preaching to non-Muslims?
Similarly, when does a sincere intellectual public blog discussion on interacial harmony (which can include lively debate), become considered as instigating racial hostility?
These are very very grey areas, and anyone can easily argue that any such discussions are illegal or seditious in their respective contexts.
In a sense, blogging exposes writers and bloggers even more than any other medium. That is because, everything said and written will be accessible by anyone. All will be in black and white and most likely, be forever and unretractable.
So, watch what you say, people... cos Big Brother is watching... scanning... googling... and collecting evidence to be used against you.
Posted by: Freddie Chong | September 20, 2005 07:01 PM
Anywhere in this (linked) The Star report do you see any reference to the now (in)famous 'Blog Buster' case?
[There's a reference to the current Singapore case, and there's a reference to the infamous 2003 Malaysiakini case.]
If not, pray tell what's new (clue?) in this report that hasn't been said before?
While we may find the flu metaphor appropriate to blogging, please let's not do a violent knee jerk and looseth the paranoia and panic bug now. Please.
Status quo ante.
Posted by: percolator | September 20, 2005 09:14 PM
What violent knee jerk and panic bug?
All this is just speculative discourse for fun and past time.
Posted by: Freddie Chong | September 20, 2005 09:55 PM
For fun eh? I wish. With the recent gung-ho blog-buster stunts? I certainly and sncerely hope EVERYONE really think this is fun.
Posted by: percolator | September 21, 2005 07:35 AM
If not for fun and past time, then for what?
Posted by: Freddie Chong | September 21, 2005 08:31 AM
"In Malaysia, it is illegal to preach Christianity or any other religion to a Muslim."
Yes, but only IN THEORY. In reality, I can think of hundreds of websites that need to be "shut down" (such as the infamous Answering Islam).
But that is where sites like Bismika Allahuma comes in. So basically, I couldn't care less as to whether the missionaries want to "preach" (read: belittle Islam) Christianity or otherwise. There are Muslims hitting back.
Best regards.
- MENJ
Posted by: menj | September 21, 2005 02:52 PM