Title : The Right to Freedom of Expression in Malaysia

Introduction

- Freedom of speech concept

- Situation of freedom of speech
- Thesis Statement: Implication of freedom of speech

Topic Sentence 1: Freedom of speech in Malaysia

- Principal of right of Freedom of Expression/Speech

- Law in the federal constitution
- Act Restricted
- Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)

Topic Sentence 2: Freedom of the Internet in Malaysia

- Communication development
- People tend to write or talk through the social media
- Example 13 May History & Muhammad Adib
- Studies about freedom of speech in the internet

Topic Sentence 3: Hate Speech

- Conceptual
- The meanings
- How it can affect

Recommendation

- News body delete negative comments

- Enforce existing laws
- Campaign on freedom of speech
- Community to think before acting

Conclusion

- In-depth study needs to be conducted

- Control their emotions and be smart and rational when voicing opinions
 TITLE: THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN MALAYSIA

As a country of various religions and races, any type of uncontrolled speech can cause
chaos. Many sensitive matters involve the relationship between religion and race. If there are
parties who fail to maintain that sensitivity, conflicts and fights will easily occur to cause the
country to be in disarray. Although the existence of the law to some extent can help alleviate
the tensions that occur, but it should not be seen or misinterpreted as a law that can be used to
curb the freedom of Malaysians to speak and express their opinions. The government must
ensure that the fundamental right of every Malaysian to have a voice remains secure.
Freedom of speech is important for every human being on earth because through it they can
do various things. It is quite difficult for a society and a country to move forward if their right
to speak is not respected and fulfilled. The concept of freedom of speech in Malaysia is
closely related to the rise of an issue fought by society such as the right to self-government,
justice, accountability, and transparency of government. Therefore, there are several channels
created to enable the issues to be fought such as through the media and NGOs. Thus, the
development of this concept of freedom of speech can be seen little by little so that it
becomes a need or human right of the people to jointly form a reaction to the course of
national administration and the course of development of society as a whole. The
development of the practice of freedom of expression could be seen when Sultanate or feudal
era, during British colonialism, during and after the independence of Malaya in 1957 and
during and after the events of May 13, 1969. Freedom of the media is often associated with
freedom of speech. Where freedom of speech in this media refers to the freedom of a party to
express or express their opinion. This freedom of expression refers to a fundamental principle
in democratic society. It also refers to the right to express information, ideas, and opinions
free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations.
However, society has different standards, especially in voicing opinions from different
perspectives. Thus, the implication of freedom of speech should not be taken lightly as it can
affect various parties.
 Individual freedom of speech is also important to maintain the spirit of democracy
that has long been practiced in Malaysia since the country gained independence in 1957. The
right of every Malaysian to speak is also clearly enshrined and protected under the Federal
Constitution itself. Part II of the Federal Constitution clearly provides for the fundamental
freedoms of every citizen. One form of fundamental freedom that is clearly protected is the
freedom of every citizen to speak, assemble and associate as contained in Article 10 (1) of the
Federal Constitution. Every type of freedom including freedom of speech and expression is
fundamental to the existence of democracy in a country. The Federal Constitution is the
supreme law in Malaysia. Any type of legal provision that the government wants to draft
must be in line with the principles and spirit of the Federal Constitution. If it is not in line
with the principles and spirit of the Federal Constitution, then the provisions of the law can
be declared void or invalid. There is no denying that every type of human rights that has been
allocated including freedom of speech is not absolute. Article 10 (2) of the Federal
Constitution provides that 'Parliament may by law impose any restrictions which it deems
necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof,
good relations with other countries, public order or moral principles and restrictions intended
to protect the privileges of Parliament or any Legislative Assembly or to provide for
opposition to contempt of court, defamation, or ignition of any offense '. With this,
Parliament can impose restrictions on freedom of expression through the law if it finds that
the restrictions are necessary in order to safeguard the interests of Federal security, good
relations with other countries, public order or moral principles. The Human Rights
Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) reaffirms its position on the principles of freedom of
expression, which is the right of all Malaysians as articulated under Article 10 of the Federal
Constitution as well as Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
SUHAKAM believes that anyone who expresses views on human rights should not suffer
from fear of reprisal or intimidation. Controversial ideas and opinions made in the context of
academic debates, political engagement or similar activities, and without any intention to
incite hatred, contempt, violence or discriminations, should be regarded as a legitimate
exercise of the right of freedom of expression. These limitations do not translate to
censorship or any suppressive acts, such as in involving state actors or making efforts to
criminalise those delivering these speeches.
 Advances in the world of technology bring about changes in communication where
communication also plays an important role in the daily routine of society. The digital age is
now making communication skills an important aspect for every individual. According to
Sulaiman (2010), the process of communication is the mainstay and inevitable for a person in
carrying out their daily activities. This communication process began to evolve from
telephone to social media. Today, social media is becoming dominant in the world of
communication. Social media is not only used to connect with each other but it is also used
to get news from online news portals. The presence of the official website of news bodies on
social media such as Facebook helps netizens to find out the issues around them. Examples of
official news agencies are Berita Harian Online, Mymetro, The Star and Facebook. Netizens
also use social media as an online news source. News agencies also use online news methods
to convey the latest issues or information to the public. Following this development, netizens
are able to give their views or reactions in the form of comments on the official news site.
Netizens are more likely to voice their views or react to an issue on social media. Netizens
also dare to voice negative opinions such as inciting or insulting a party on social media.
Some cases of abuse of freedom of expression have been legally punished. According to Wan
Amizah & Muhammad Adnan (2017) several cases of insult to the royal institution have been
identified and offenders are given appropriate punishment. This study also calls for freedom
and control to be balanced for the sake of national harmony and well-being. Acts and
legislation are mandatory elements that must be held in a country for the purpose of
monitoring and controlling the internet. This is said because, some irresponsible parties use
social media to express dissatisfaction with any party. Further studies that state that media
freedom should be restricted to ensure national harmony and security, Yayha Abdul Rahman
(2017). Among the reasons is the diversity of society. In 1969, some sensitive issues were
raised at that time which led to a racial issue, the May 13 tragedy. The main factor riots
occurred because of the General Election Campaign (1969) carried out through the
newspapers such as Utusan Melayu and Chinese newspapers like Nanyang Siang Pau. This
creates racial tensions among the people. Therefore, the media control over freedom of
expression must be held in order to ensure the well-being and security of the country. Romlah
Ramli (2016) in his study explained that the development of technology, especially the
existence of the internet and social media brings a lot of social change for a society, where
with the freedom of speech they express their opinions without emphasizing moral values.
Especially this can be seen on social media where people show dissatisfaction or give their
opinions by using immoral words. Free writing on social media has led to chaos in the
country. Thus we need to look at how netizens use freedom of speech in sensational issues.
To control freedom of speech on social media, suggestions for improvement are also need to
be discussed.

The term hate connotes an idea of something unpleasant. According to the Oxford
English Dictionary, the term hate implies something towards which someone has a strong
aversion to or dislike for or conjures a temperament of dislike (Lexico, 2019). By adding the
term “speech” to the word, “hate” brings out a concept, which has held society in its
grip throughout time, once a neologism a phenomenon that has crept into public discourse
with an ease that the lexicon is no longer an uncharted territory but has become common
parlance. Hate speech, composed of two very generic terms, hate and speech, in the eyes of a
layman refers to words or connotations that have the potential of rousing one’s emotions,
feelings that are averse towards certain objects Hate speech may be a verbal expression,
which is designed to advance scorn based on race, religion, ethnicity and savagery between
distinctive communities. Hate speech are systematically utilized to lash contempt towards
minorities and for kindling territorial, devout and ethnic enthusiasm. It has been more than
once watched that kindling and pernicious words have been utilized by individuals of impact
to encourage their vested interface and prompt viciousness. Malaysian laws preclude anybody
from making hate speeches that disturb the communal harmony and makes friction among the
individuals. When the issue of concealment of hate speech comes to domain, the idea of
sensible confinement comes into picture. Around the world, hate speech is on the rise, and the
language of prohibition and minimization has crawled into media scope, online stages and
national approaches. Communities are confronting tricky levels of narrow mindedness,
counting rising anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, as well as the contempt and abuse of
Christians and other religious groups. Within the open field, discourse has been weaponised
for political pick up with unfriendly talk coordinated at minorities, vagrants, refugees, ladies
and the so-called “Other”. Hate speech debilitates and devastates communities, sowing seeds
of fear, contempt and doubt. When cleared out unchecked it can lead to viciousness and
indeed help set conditions for genocide.
 The suggestion given for improvement to control freedom of speech in the News is
that the news body needs to delete negative comments. This action cannot be taken 100
percent if no report is received. Furthermore, the voices of the media and the voices of
netizens are different. I suggest that news agencies often publish news - news based on facts
and not just inventions. Thus, the voice of the media is often correct and accurate which
causes confusion is the voice of netizens. Therefore, the news body can remind netizens not
to voice their negative opinion as the rest is in the hands of the government and society. The
government needs to enforce existing laws. This is said to be because, lack of enforcement
makes netizens more daring to voice negative views or opinions. Freedom of speech on social
media needs to be tightened by imposing appropriate punishment. The government should
also increase the punishment for cases involving sensitive issues. This is said because
netizens prefer to comment on sensitive issues published by news agencies on social media
compared to other issues. This can also complicate the situation in the country and also
complicate the police to conduct investigations. For example, the issue of Muhammad Adib
has caused confusion due to various reactions given by netizens so that the police instructed
netizens not to associate this issue with racial issues. Therefore, control must be made and
complaints received should be completed immediately and brought to justice. To avoid such
things, I also suggested that the government should hold a campaign on freedom of speech on
an ongoing basis. This is said because the community can understand the impact that occurs
with the comments given when the community is involved with these campaigns
continuously. The government should also ensure that the campaign is held continuously so
that the community can understand more deeply about the pros and cons as well as the right
way to voice opinions on social media such as Mymetro. I also advise the community to think
before acting, that is, before expressing an opinion on social media. An example is the issue
of Muhammad Adib. It is a sensitive issue and it involves two different races, namely the
Malay and Indian. Indeed, every Malaysian has the freedom of speech as found in human
rights is among the existing acts as contained in Article 10 (1) of the Federal Constitution but
how society accepts sensational issues like the case of Muhammad Adib is their own views
and choices. This is because some netizens do not know how to properly express opinions in
the form of comments on an issue. Every news broadcast by a news agency is factual. This
means that this fact is explained by the informant, that is, it refers to all reports from the
beginning of the incident until the court completes the decision of the PDRM-sourced inquest
and trial in court.
 Social media has become a medium for netizens to voice their opinions or views.
Moreover, the presence of online news makes it easier for netizens to give reactions or
opinions from various perspectives. This is because online news conveys the latest issues
faster than print newspapers. With its existence, the comment space on every official website
of a news body such as Berita Harian Online makes it easier for netizens to voice their
opinions. This can pose a threat to national harmony if freedom of speech is abused.
Therefore, in order to avoid such things, an in-depth study needs to be conducted to improve
freedom of speech on social media such as enforcing existing laws by the government. The
next suggestion is that the news body should delete the negative comments and for the
community, netizens should think before voicing opinions on social media so that it does not
pose a threat or offend others. Netizens should think and act rationally when voicing opinions
on social media. History proves irrational freedom of speech and reckless behaviour also
causes racial strife as happened on 13 May 1969 which is the event of racial dissatisfaction
with other races in Malaysia, Ahmad Zaharuddin (2015). This freedom can cause fights and
chaos in this country. Therefore, every individual who uses social media should control their
emotions and be smart and rational when voicing opinions.
REFERENCE

Owoyemi, Musa Yusuf and Din, Abdul Kadir and Ahmad Sabri, Ahmad Zaharuddin Sani
(2015) The diaspora Nigerians’ image problem of drug and fraud: A case study of the
Malaysian-Indonesian experience through newspaper reports. Journal of Social
Sciences, 11 (2). pp. 55-71. ISSN 1549-3652

Ramli, R. (2016). Sejauhmana Kebebasan Dalam Media Sosial: Peradaban Sosial Dan Privasi
Dalam Sempadan Keagamaan. Journal of Techno Social, 8(1). Retrieved from
https://publisher.uthm.edu.my/ojs/index.php/JTS/article/view/1361

Rahman, A. (2017). Impact of State Control on Media Freedom in Malaysia. Journal of

Social Sciences and Humanity. Retrieved from http://ejournal.ukm.my/
ebangi/article/view/22741/7213

Wan Amizah Wan Mahmud, and Muhammad Adnan Pitchan, (2017) Media baharu dan
institusi raja di Malaysia: kes penghinaan raja-raja di media sosial. Jurnal Komunikasi
;Malaysian Journal of Communication, 33 (1). pp. 406-422. ISSN 0128-1496

Sulaiman Md. Yassin, Mohd Salleh Lebar & Azlina Abu Bakar @ Mohd (2010). Komunikasi
dalam pengajaran dan kepimpinan pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: Karisma Publications
Sdn Bhd.

Federal Constitution

SUHAKAM Website