The Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression editorial 2—6 Freedom of Speech and Expression Under Threat published by spotlight 6—15 the asian-pacific resource and research centre for women (arrow) Feminists Navigating Digital resources from the arrow Space and Countering srhr knowledge sharing Technology ‘Enabling’ centre 26—28 Violence other resources 29—30 “Rape Her”: Gendered Hate monitoring countries and Speech Against Rohingya regional activities 19—25 published with the funding Women definitions 30—31 support of Does the Digital Security Act Lip Sync to Jail Increase Insecurity for People factfile 31—34 in Bangladesh? Equal Before God?: Women Freedom of Speech and and the Right to Freedom of Fiji’s Online Safety Act Expression and Sexual and Religion Reproductive Health and The Challenge of Protecting Rights: Connections and Free Speech in Duterte’s Contemporary Context in the Asia Pacific Region arrow receives institutional in our own words 16—18 Philippines support from the Ford Foundation and the Foundation for a Just Working Around Media The Blasphemy Regime in editorial and Society Censorship to Tell Our Stories Pakistan production team 36 2 arrow for change | vol. 26 no. 1 2020 editorial By Rachel Arinii FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND East-Asia and ASEAN Programme Manager, FORUM-ASIA EXPRESSION UNDER THREAT Email: [email protected] This editorial was created by extracting expression. While platforms are available, Part II: Freedom of Speech and information from FORUM-ASIA’s the uneven distribution in the access Expression in East Asia – Freedom of publication titled, “The Instrument of to, use of, or impact of information expression is heavily restricted in East Repressions: Regional Report on the technologies severely affect women Asia. Governments utilise a range of legal status of Freedom of Expressions, and LGBTIQ persons access to online means to control and monitor information Assembly and Association in Asia” as well freedom of expressions. In addition, online and offline. In China, publication as the “Briefing Paper on COVID-19 in surveillance technology has increased houses are required to have government ASEAN: The Human Rights Crisis and How insecurity, especially to dissenting voices. licenses. Unauthorised publishers, news to End It”. Wiretapping, social media tracking, agencies, and journalists face the risk of biometric and facial recognition used by being closed down if found to be non- We cannot have democracy without state and non-state actors are utilised to compliant. The State Public Officials freedom of expression. The regional trend further silence dissent, often leading to Act in South Korea and the Social Order of further oppression to the civic space judicial harassment and systematic cyber- Maintenance Act in Taiwan both restrict contributes to the heightened intimidation attacks to those focused on human rights individuals attempting to express opinions and risks faced by women human rights issues. that may be detrimental to ‘public order.’ defenders (WHRDs) across the region. This editorial outlines recommendations While platforms are available, Censorship and heavy restrictions for the improvement of existing policies, the uneven distribution in the have also encroached cyberspace. which would enable progressive action by China’s National Security Law contains governments, policymakers, duty-bearers, access to, use of, or impact broad provisions designed to control non-governmental bodies, and other of information technologies and manage online content. A 2016 stakeholders. severely affect women and Cybersecurity Law further strengthens LGBTIQ persons access to online existing censorship regulations and Part 1: Regional Trends and Trajectory – mandates Internet service providers to Within already increasingly authoritarian freedom of expressions. actively monitor customers’ accounts. countries, governments are using the South Korea’s Network Act and COVID-19 pandemic as a cover to further The recent shutdown of ABS-CBN Mongolia’s state-run Communications the implementation of existing policies Philippines and conviction of journalist Regulatory Commission regulate online that curtail peaceful dissent. For others, Maria Rhesa is only a snippet of the freedom of expression and empower the pandemic served as a justification for depressing erosion facing Asian press government bodies to monitor and censor initiating new decrees, laws and policies, freedom.1 Asia holds the dubious online content. or using existing ones to arbitrarily restrict distinction of being home to both the human rights. most prolific jailer of journalists (China) These laws have been used against and the deadliest places for them to work government critics to stifle dissenting Almost all ASEAN Member States in (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Philippines views that relate to both the political and have criminalised the dissemination of and Bangladesh).2 One of the trends civic space. South Korea’s Park Geun- disinformation or what they consider to be that is common across Asia is the use Hye administration used the Network Act ‘fake news’ in offline and online spaces, of restrictive laws and legislation, to prosecute critics. These included the resulting in the curtailment of necessary including those that lead to financial sentencing of Park Sung-su for printing information and dialogue, and often clampdown on media outlets or human material critical of the government, and covering measures targeting peaceful rights defenders. Whether in the form of the filing of defamation cases against six government critics or dissidents. defamation laws, sedition acts, or foreign journalists who had published a report on funding restrictions, archaic or vaguely a leaked document. While the atmosphere Technology and digital space are also formulated laws are used to silence for HRDs in Taiwan is relatively free, impacting freedom of speech and expression.3 some activists have been charged 3 editorial arrow for change | vol. 26 no. 1 2020 under the Social Order Maintenance State ownership and restrictions on illegitimately criminalised in Bangladesh, Act (SOMA) for attempting to bring foreign media further discourage placing the burden on the accused to attention to domestic issues. A lack of State accountability. In Malaysia, the prove such content was published for enabling laws for the protection of human Immigration Law bars foreign media ‘public good’. AKM Wahiduzzaman, rights defenders in China, Mongolia and from indirectly participating in ‘affairs a geography professor was jailed for South Korea have also limited recourses of the State’. The government inspects defamation for a Facebook comment for HRDs in cases of harassment or all program content of foreign media referring to Prime Minister Sheikh repression.4 in Vietnam, and foreign journalists can Hasina as ‘pesudo scholar’. In India the be refused access for reporting on government’s wide powers over the Part III: Freedom of Speech and politically sensitive issues. press and publishing houses has led Expression in South East Asia – the State to widely limit free expression Restrictions on the practice of freedom Repressive laws are used to target human despite the laws providing governments of expression in South East Asia exist rights defenders and political dissidents. with somewhat less space to censor or under the guise of preserving national They remain subject to fabricated ban free speech. Much of the limitations interests, national security or protecting charges, State-sanctioned violence, come from Article 95 of the Penal Code a country’s morals or religious beliefs. imprisonment and extrajudicial killings. In that has empowered the government to Cambodia’s Press Law prohibits Malaysia, the Sedition Act has been used seize and forfeit publications suspected the publication of information that to prosecute those who speak out against to incite enmity between groups, and may compromise national security, the government and its policies. In insult religion. Indonesia’s Broadcast Act limits Cambodia, four human rights defenders broadcast content, while Myanmar and were a given a six-month sentence Repressive laws are used to Malaysia both have laws that limit the under a law prohibiting ‘’insult and printing or publishing of information. In obstruction to a public official’. In 2017, target human rights defenders Laos, the Constitution bans information the Philippines President threatened and political dissidents. They that can be seen as being against the human rights defenders speaking remain subject to fabricated country’s interests. Vietnam’s criminal against the campaign against illegal charges, State-sanctioned code bans criticism of the government. drugs.5 In 2020, through the Bayanihan violence, imprisonment and act, the Philippines criminalised those- Timor Leste’s Media Law restricts participating in cyber incidents that took extrajudicial killings. publications from releasing content advantage of the current pandemic.6 that impinge on the right to honour In 2013, the Calcutta high Court ordered and reputation, while Singapore’s Part IV: Freedom of Speech and a stay on Sahara: The Untold Story, a Undesirable Publications Act can Expression in South Asia – In book by Ramal Tamal Bandyopadhya ban publications deemed ‘obscene’. Bangladesh and India, freedom of for publishing details on a business Blasphemy and defamation laws carry expression, particularly of the press, conglomerate. In 2014, Penguin India with them heavy punishments. In is limited by government