Freedom of speech refers to the right of individuals or associations to express their opinions and ideas, its similar nature includes but is not exhaustive of press freedom, academic freedom and freedom of assembly. In Malaysia, our freedom of speech is guaranteed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the Federal Constitution. However, due to ignorance and a total unawareness of its importance and significance, the public in general keep a casual attitude on the need for freedom of speech.
Ever since the ‘Sheraton Move’, the Perikatan Nasional (PN) government intensified its suppression on freedom of speech in the country. Several rising right-wingers are also actively promoting conservativeness among the people, partnering with the PN government to quash voices of dissent. In addition to those who were targeted by the right-wingers, including UMANY, members of the civil society, the opposition party and minority groups, there was also the local film director, Namewee.
Recently, the local film “BABI” directed by Namewee has caused heated debate among citizens. Right-wingers opined that the film intended to incite racial relations and to tarnish Malaysia’s image, which actions should be taken by the government. In relation to this, the PN youths lodged a police report last month, urging their PN government to investigate Namewee. Freedom of speech is what we have always been defending, but in the eyes of the right-wingers, it is a toxic ideology produced by the Western liberalists, which should be fought against.
But why do we still believe that freedom of speech is important?
No country or society in this world is exempted from ills. A joint effort between the citizens and the government is much needed to push for a change, and the very first step, is to expose the elephant in the room. Freedom of speech entitles the people to discuss and criticize existing problems in the country and the solutions thereon. No matter how contentious or serious the issues are, one should not be treated with censorship and unfair suppressions. Different opinions and ideas should be opened for public discourse and review, for the ongoing issues to be improved and solved.
The government who is vested with public power ought to be ensuring protection for everyone's rights to freedom of speech, but not wiping away dissenting voices for the sake of implementing policies without a hitch. Since their public power was given by the people, the people should have the rights, or even the duty to comment and criticize on the ruling government’s administration in the country. To withhold the people’s rights to freedom of speech, signifies the loss of their crucial democratic rights, of all, that is to restrict the government. Once the government possesses an authoritarian environment of public opinion, then it could dominate the people’s thinking, and even to the extent of manipulating the voter’s choice during the general election.
Even if a social value gains majority adherence, people are still free to discuss and criticize it. A social value having majority’s support does not imply the flawlessness of it, as human beings' thoughts are never infallible. A social value will improve only if the freedom to publicly discuss and criticize it exists. Furthermore, a seemingly sensible social value gaining adherence from all parties is also subjected to discussion and criticism, because once a social value is not discussed or debated periodically, it will become an unchallengeable dogma. People living under petrified social values will find their minds deteriorating, and become intolerant to new voices.
China and North Korea held the best portrayal of a society devoid of freedom of speech. In Malaysia, the devastating effects of the deprivation of freedom of speech can be shown in AUKU governed institutions: university students aspired to become the burning fuel for GDP by rushing their pointer and ko-k marks, while university societies became a gathering place for making friends and recreational activities. Most people are scared of voicing out for their rights, only to remain silent and lamenting over their grievances once they are suppressed. The so-called future pillars of our nation are lack of critical thinking and individual thoughts, not mentioning the seldom questioning of putrefying social values. An incontestable university management also became quasi-dictators that ignored students’ voices.
The infiltration of racial politics into the education system and educators results in the plethora of racial incidents occurring in national schools. Namewee filmed the movie solely to present these facts to the public, with the hope of encouraging reflections towards racial issues in the country. Conservatives’ coordinated attack on this video and the actions of utilizing the authorities to censor these voices further manifests the grave danger freedom of speech is facing in our country.
Our attitude towards these crises determines whether we can freely express our opinion and ideas in the future. The people, including university students, can share their opinions in defending their rights, encourage their peers to pay more attention to current affairs, and participate in more civil society activities. University societies can organize events aimed to spread political awareness and voice out on national issues more frequently. The fate of all of us are closely intertwined, today, it is Namewee’s film being assaulted, but in the future, it is us that might be witch-hunted by the government and the conservatives for harbouring different opinions.
Campus democracy, student autonomy
UMANY
Comments