Contemporary Debate on Freedom of Speech and Expression Concerning Film Censorship Laws in Malaysia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
[2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 1 CONTEMPORARY DEBATE ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION CONCERNING FILM CENSORSHIP LAWS IN MALAYSIA by MD. ZAHIDUL ISLAM* ABSTRACT Freedom of speech is a vital element to humanity and for the foundation of a free society. The making and exhibition of films also falls under the free speech clause. Like other fundamental liberties, freedom of speech does not have any absolute form and it is related to the reputation of others like national security issues, public mental health and moral instincts. It is a contemporary debate that freedom of speech is restricted by censorship laws. The aim of this paper is to identify the relationship between freedom of speech and expression concerning censorship laws of Malaysia. It is a qualitative research. The information has been collected studying articles, books, newspapers and statutes. The restrictions on freedom of speech are acceptable for the interest of security of a state, public order and to establish friendly relationships with other foreign countries. In this case, censorship plays an important role to protect moral values, and law and order in a country. Keywords: Film; Freedom; Speech; Expression; Laws; Malaysia; [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 2 INTRODUCTION Freedom of speech and expression is a power or right to express one’s opinions without censorship, restraint or legal penalty. It is a constitutional right as well as a fundamental right of citizens. It is fundamental to the existence of democracy and respect for human dignity. Although it is a constitutional right, it has been restricted in terms of national and international laws since early times when aristocratic rulers only allowed certain classes of citizens to express their opinions without fear and freedom of speech and expression was restricted. It was reserved for adult male citizens not for juveniles, women and resident aliens (Tedford, 2001). Similarly, the word ‘censorship’ denotes excision, hindrance, termination, regulation or controlling of an inefficient motive. It limits or prevents the free exchange of information (Steele, 1999). Censorship means act of changing or suppressing speech or writing that is considered subversive to the common phenomenon. In the past, most governments believed that their duty is to regulate the moral values of their people by the country’s laws; but with the right of freedom of speech, censorship became objectionable. The word ‘censorship’ should not be given limited meaning, that is, excisions on the ground of morality only, but should have a liberal meaning, that is, excision, stop, regulation, control (Dacca Picture Palace Ltd. v. Pakistan, 1966). “Censorship” is a controversial word that exists to some extent in all countries and it is considered of great [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 3 importance throughout the ages. However, the law and order situation is worse in some countries than in others. Historically, in most cases, the rulers tried to censor, ban or suppress different literary works, music and thoughts of people because those went against the interests of the rulers. This issue has become a part of law which is to be applied very seriously and cautiously. One of the grounds for censorship is obscenity which resulted in many creative works and thoughts of the people being censored or banned. FREEDOM OF SPEECH: THE POSITION IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION OF MALAYSIA The right to freedom of speech and expression has been provided by the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. According to Article 10(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, “Every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression.” However, Article 10(2)(a) states that the government may impose restrictions regarding freedom of speech and expression to protect (a) the security of the Federation or any part it; (b) the friendly relations with other countries; (c) public order; (d) morality; (e) privilege of the parliament; (f) contempt of court; (g) defamation; (h) incitement of an offense. The restrictions are also imposed by the court. In Madhavan Nair v. Public Prosecutor [1975] 1 LNS 94; [1975] 2 MLJ 264, it was held that: “Any condition is considered to be invalid, that is limiting the exercise of the fundamental right to freedom of speech included in the four corners of article 10 clause (2), (3), and (4) of the Federal Constitution.” In another case of Lau Dak Kee v. Public Prosecutor [1976] 1 LNS 54; [1976] 2 MLJ 229, Mohamed Azmi J said [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 4 “Article 10(1) of the Federal Constitution guarantees the rights to every citizen to freedom of speech, assembly and make associations. However, those rights are subjected to any law passed by Parliament.” So, this kind of censorship restricts the freedom of speech in the State. Articles 149 and 150 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia have imposed another form of restriction on freedom of speech and expression. Article 149 provides that if any Act of Parliament implies any action has been taken or threatened by any substantial body of persons whether inside or outside the federation, any provision of law that is designed to prevent such harmful action is valid. Article 150 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia provides power to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for the proclamation of any emergency situation in order to prevent any circumstances that may endanger the security of Malaysia. Under this article and by the virtue of this law; even if Parliament is not in session, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has the power to legislate the proclamation and Ordinance to enact laws. Discussion of the other forms of freedom (for example freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion) is also important for an overall visualization of the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech and expression cannot be sufficiently understood without comparing freedom of speech with the cross reference to other forms of freedom. It is discussed elaborately in the provisions of Articles 5, 9, 10 or 13 of the Federal Constitution. The Internal Security Act 1960 was derived from these provisions. [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 5 These other forms of freedom are also a part of freedom of speech and expression. Due to this fact, some scholars have stated that the right of freedom of speech and expression must be understood in the light of certain rights; mostly the rights to peaceful assembly and association. For example, public meetings are one of the frequent practices of influencing the public for any opinion on vast issues. However, under the Malaysian Federal Constitution, this is not the only right that can be seen from the perspective of freedom of speech and expression. So, the meaning of freedom of speech is very comprehensive. It is not only limited to oral speech. Moreover, Article 10(2) can impose restrictions to protect the security of the federation, the friendly relations with other countries, public order, morality, privilege of Parliament, contempt of court, defamation and incitement of an offense. At this point, it appears that there is a censorship on freedom of speech and it is permitted by the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. For a better understanding, other forms of freedom as mentioned before are discussed below. Other Related Freedoms Freedom of speech and expression is also related to freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of press, freedom of religion and freedom of information. Freedom of assembly is a way to express views or opinions. It has a plain connection with the notion of freedom of speech and expression. Based on the need of citizens, a citizen has the right to protest in a democratic way by freedom of assembly. In a democratic country an ordinary citizen can bring up matters to get the [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 6 consensus of others including members of Parliament. Article 10(1) (b) of Federal Constitution of Malaysia says, “all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms”. Moreover, according to article 10(2)(b), Parliament may impose restriction against freedom of assembly in order to protect the security of the Federation or any part, or public order. In Cheah Beng Poh v. Public Prosecutor [1983] 1 LNS 65; [1984] 2 MLJ 225 SC, the High Court issued a rule that police permission is required to arrange a public meeting or procession. This rule is obviously a restriction to freedom of assembly. So it is one kind of censorship to the citizen. Moreover, freedom of assembly has also been restricted by the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012. Under this Act, if any person attends a peaceful assembly who is under twenty-one years old, it shall be an offence. That means people do not have the right to join peaceful assembly, if he/she is under twenty-one years old. Therefore, it is one kind of censorship to that citizen who is under the age of twenty-one. Like freedom of assembly, freedom of association is also connected to freedom of speech and expression. An individual is permitted to claim the right to form an association with a group of people in order to make his or her views known to the public under the Malaysian Federal Constitution. Article 10(1)(c) says that “all citizens have the right to form associations.” Article 10(1)(c) gives the right to form an association, but article 10(2)(c) imposes some restriction or censorship. Article 10(2)(c) says that “Parliament may by law impose on the right conferred by paragraph (c) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, or public order or morality.” Under this article it is easy to [2019] 1 LNS(A) cxlvii Legal Network Series 7 understand that censorship also exists here.