PETALING JAYA - While the government's recent action of charging dissidents in court might produce the desired effect in near future, it might not get the long term effect and might risk losing the support of more liberal public.
"The government should make use social justice as police to control the act of irresponsible individuals issuing statements that might offend other religions or races."
About 500 UM students, professors and representatives of civil organizations attended a peace rally in support of law professor Azmi Sharom, urging the repeal of the outdated Sedition Act 1948.
Azmi Sharom refused to comment on the statement issued by Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail that the government would review several cases involving the Sedition Act, and said he was touched by the fact that many students had lent him moral support today.
Backlash
Meanwhile current affairs critic Tan Ah Chai said using Sedition Act against dissidents might work to some extent, as some people might try to avoid saying wrong things for the time being, or just remain silent or in low key.
However, he said citing Sedition Act alone might not produce the desired effects in the long run. Moreover, if the government's action is seen as irrational, it could evolve into an international issue, thanks to the rapid dissemination of information over the Internet.
"This could in turn create a bigger backlash, and such an emotion is beginning to take shape as seen in the increased support among the academic circle for the UM law professor."
On why the government has taken actions against dissidents in recent weeks, Tan said the country is at a crossroads after the general elections last year as many remain anxious over the country's future directions and both the ruling coalition and the opposition have failed to come up with more effective measures.
"The public have grown equally unhappy with the BN and Pakatan after GE13, and the government is facing continuous skepticism and criticisms from the public.'
Not only politicians are targeted now
When contacted by Sin Chew Daily, co-chairman of the Bar Council Human Rights Committee Andrew Khoo Chin Hock said the legal actions taken by the AF's Chambers of late have expanded in scope from targeting specifically politicians to social activists, NGO representatives and even ordinary citizens.
"They don't only target politicians now. Any ordinary citizen can be arrested and charged while the law cited is no longer confined to the Sedition Act but expanded to Penal Code and Communications & Multimedia Act, with the objective of creating that 'chilling effect.'"
He did not think that the AG's statement showed the government's goodwill in resolving this matter as it failed to explicitly indicate that the government would revoke these cases, or that Azmi would face an alternative lesser charge.
"Even if yes, I don't think Azmi would plead guilty. Why should you do so if you are not wrong?"
He said while the government's actions might be endorsed by the conservatives, the government is at risk of losing the support of the more liberal among the public.
Temporary chilling effect
Eric Paulsen, executive director of Lawyers for Liberty, told Sin Chew Daily the AG's Chambers' actions will only produce short-term effects but in the long run, they will embolden the public to defend their freedom of expression.
Judging from the recent arrests targeting politicians, academics, social activists and web users in recent weeks, Paulsen said the authorities are working very hard to create the "chilling effect."
Although the legal actions might make people more cautious when speaking their minds, this will only be a temporary phenomenon, Khoo said, adding that it would be very difficult for the government to maintain the chilling effect over the long term, as people have more access to unlimited information and are becoming mentally more independent.
The repeal of ISA has lifted the fears of some people. At least they will not be detained before trial.
As such, he said the public will not keep mum forever and will be bolder the criticize the government for abusing the Sedition Act.
The government will only be aware that controlling public's freedom of expression through legal actions will backfire if the public are bold to speak up.
"But that does not mean you can deliberately attack other people's religions and races. You can criticize other people, but must do it in the right way and not to harm or attack anyone."
On the conviction and imprisonment of a 37-year-old man for insulting the Prophet on Facebook, Khoo said while the government can take actions against anyone raising religious or ethnic sensitivity, but not to send them to jail.
"Unless the person involved goes out and incite public emotions into violence, sending a person to jail for what he speaks is something very serious. This shows that the government has been too harsh." -Mysinchew
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.