Fake news law opens up a new can of worms

The mantra that Prime Minister Najib Razak espoused before the election in 2013 was: “The days of the government knows what is best for the people are over. We will engage the rakyat whenever there is a need to.”

Five years later, these infamous words hold little value in view of the proposed fake news law which is being rushed through without all stakeholders being consulted.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Azalina Othman had meetings with representatives of social media platforms. Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi hosted a lunch with media editors and owners. What about journalists and journalists’ groups?

What was the outcome of these meetings? Some of those who attended were more interested in advertisement revenue lost to Google and Facebook or too busy ghost-writing blogs for their political masters. The people who do the actual work have been conveniently left out and are totally in the dark over the proposed legislation.

On March 8, Azalina was quoted as saying that the draft would be submitted to the cabinet in two weeks’ time. In Singapore, a 10-man parliamentary committee is holding hearings on similar laws. Anyone who wants to give his or her take on the proposed laws can do so. In Malaysia’s case, why the rush?

And to explain the sort of mess journalists are likely to get in, here’s a hypothetical scenario.

Assuming there is a politician who supports and advocates the government’s anti-gay policy and but leads a double life. That politician makes statements against the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community but as weekend approaches, the person indulges in secret trysts. Naturally, that individual would be labelled a hypocrite who does not practise what one’s preaches.

The above is a concoction. I just want to use it to illustrate the kind of problem we could face with the proposed fake news law.

So if what is written above is not true, would it breach the new law that is being promulgated? Will there be any politician coming forward to complain that this is fake news?

But who was the reference made to? I may have been referring to the House of Commons where MPs have come out and declared themselves as gays or lesbians. I could also be referring to India where there “closet lesbians”, who because of adverse publicity, maintain secret liaisons.

Herein is a major problem. Would I have committed an offence under the new law? Who would say that I was referring particularly to him or her? Does he or she have to prove that he or she is not gay? Or do I have to prove he or she is one? Do I have to produce witnesses who had seen this person in intimate positions with someone of the same sex.

What if I plead not guilty to the charge? Will they have to produce witnesses to state the contrary?

No journalist worth his salt will dare write a story unless he has solid facts. No editor would allow the publication of these allegations unless he is convinced that there are enough documents to back such outrageous claims.

Columnists and commentators have most to fear. We are opinionated, and on many occasions, do not mince our words. The failure of the protagonists to reply or react or respond to queries also puts us in a spot. And does giving a comment or opinion contrary to that of the establishment constitute fake news?

Whose version is fake?

For example, three years ago, Prime Minister Najib Razak threatened to sue the Wall Street Journal when it first reported that RM2.6 billion went into his personal bank account. To date, he has not done so and The Economist in its latest edition on Malaysia and the PM was headlined “Stop Thief.”

Meanwhile, the whole cabinet seems to believe, and some have expressed the view, that 1MDB has not lost a single sen. Even inspector-general of police Mohamad Fuzi Harun issued a statement stating that investigations had revealed Low Taek Jho @ Jho Low had never worked in 1MDB and there was no strong evidence that he was involved in its dealings.

But Petaling Jaya Utara MP disputed this and pointed to the letter from Bank Negara which stated that Jho Low was directly linked to country’s sovereign wealth fund through a company which he controls.

The letter to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) dated April 6, 2016, confirmed Low as the owner of Good Star Limited, a company which received US$1.03 billion (RM4.2 billion) from 1MDB. So, if we publish the IGP’s statement, are we publishing fake news because his version of events is being disputed?

By the way, why do we need new laws when existing laws are sufficient? On March 9, a former religious teacher and a herbal entrepreneur were each fined RM2,000 by the Sessions Court for falsely communicating on Facebook that a container containing pork mixed with mutton was brought into the country from Spain, last year.

They were charged under Section 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 punishable under Section 233(3) of the same act which provides for a maximum fine of RM50,000 or jail up to a year or both, and can also be additionally fined RM1,000 for each day the offence continued to be committed post-conviction.

Some editors of English newspapers and private TV stations have banned words and phrases like “1MDB”, “Jho Low;” “kleptocracy” and “Equanimity”. If you read the local newspapers or watch news on television, everything is hunky dory in Malaysia. 1MDB has not lost a single sen and neither has the government, so much so it is foregoing about RM420 million seized by the Swiss authorities.

Even remotely mentioning the “RM2.6 billion donation” would invite trouble. In the meantime, The Economist and MSNBCtelevision referred to the prime minister as a “thief”. No one has protested but it will be interesting to ask if the mainstream newspapers and TV stations are willing to quote The Economist or the MSNBC in their reports.

Do they have the gall or gumption, or will the word “thief” join the glossary of unusable words?

---

R NADESWARAN believes that freedom of expression and a vibrant free press are vital for a thriving democracy. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com. -Mkini