Limiting Political Freedom in Malaysia

The assignment content discusses the freedom of speech and democracy in Malaysia, comparing it with that of the United Kingdom. It highlights the restrictions imposed by the Malaysian government on political freedom, civil society, and oppositions, which is not seen in the UK. The government of Malaysia uses laws and powers to strengthen its own position, centralizing power and limiting public views. The author concludes that there can be no half democracy, either it exists or does not.

RUNNING HEAD: FREEDOM OF SPEECH 1
NAME OF THE STUDENT
NAME OF THE COLLEGE
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN MALAYSIA
REPORT

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 2
ABSTRACT
This report speaks about the freedom of speech in Malaysia. We all are acquainted by the
recent news of Malaysia related to riots and protests on limiting their freedom to express in the
country. Here we will discuss about Malaysia’s past experiences of freedom of speech and
executing rules and regulations. We will also talk about the problems Malaysia has come through
all the way. The topic is discussed in detail along with examples of recent scenarios which have
transpired in the country. The freedom of speech in Malaysia will also be compared to that of the
United Kingdom.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 3
Contents
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................3
DEMOCRACY IN MALAYSIA..........................................................................................................................4
THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE UNTITED KINGDOM...............................................................................7
COMPARISON OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN MALAYSIA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM..................................9
CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................................10
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................11

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 4
INTRODUCTION
This article talks about the freedom of speech in Malaysia. The recent incidents in the
country have not given a positive stimulus to the world about their freedom to express in the
country. The constitution of Malaysia officially has given the statement that people of the
country have a right to speak and express themselves on any matter and form unions based on
like thoughts. But, on the other hand, it also restricts the limits of their rights under the Section 2.
As per the constitution, this is for the interest and safety of the national security and also for
bringing a sense of respect to the government.
The constitution as well as the other Laws has a provision and rights to seek and punish
the ones who are found to be misbehaving with the freedom that they have got. They also have a
right to punish the ones who are found exceeding their rights and taking the government for
granted. Basically, the government doesn’t support controversial speak ups on issues that are
related to the special favors and rights offered to the native people of Malaysia.
It is often argued that Malaysia is a multiracial society. It is mostly liable to the conflicts
related to race, and the country requires laws which stop the spread of racial prejudice and
bigotry of religious views. Constitution prohibits public speeches which advocate or talk about
forcible cause the downfall of the federation.
There, in Malaysia, political speech is not prohibited in the country but has its limits.
These speeches must be circumscribed by the limits of racial harmony and national stability.
The question is- IS THIS DEMOCRACY, REALLY DEMOCRACY?

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 5
DEMOCRACY ALA MALAYSIA
These words “democracy ala Malaysia” mean “the democracy according to the needs of
government”. This statement was raised by the Bari son national government stating that the
country obviously has to maintain the harmony in racial, political and social ways and increase
the stability and security but this must not be done by compromising with the state and definition
of democracy.
Democracy means, a person has the right to express himself or herself as per his or her
thoughts and views. By limitations of this freedom of speech, the government cannot reach to its
highest level. Being overzealous about the system and democracy is not a good option for the
future of the country and its people.
Going back to the records, here is a case what happened in October 2003.
Mahathir Mohammad, prime minister of Malaysia at that time claimed that too much
freedom of speech and democracy can lead to anarchy and destruction of multiracial society in
Malaysia. He used his power for the detention of a terrorist, suspect and also banned the
communist party from taking part in the elections. Elections are a major part of democracy and it
gives a sense of harmony amongst the citizens as well the authorities.
The power holders in Malaysia have forgotten the real meaning of democracy in the urge
to respect federation and the constitution.
Prime Minister’s words on the social platform meant, that, if a person or a group of
people are trying to incite a race or a riot, he is actually going against the democracy and the
decision of a majority. Any actions which would seem undemocratic as per the government will

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 6
be taken under action. He also said that “because of an obsession of democracy, anarchy can take
place in the country”.
Afterwards, Mahathir was replaced by his son, as he being the successor. Abdullah
Ahmad Badawi, his son, spoke in his speech at the parliament that he supports and respects
democracy and promised to take criticism from the public in a positive manner. He also showed
his interest in upholding democracy for fighting corruption and terrorism. However, he even
added to the statement that-
The meaning of democracy must not be misunderstood as absolute freedom. Any issues
which would inflame racial, religious and sentiments of culture will not be sensationalized. All
the attempts to destroy peace in the country and risking national security will be dealt with
seriousness and firm actions.
Although, Malaysia has been an example for tolerance with any kinds of peoples and
immigrant. People from so many countries, especially India and China come to Malaysia for
their personal purposes. They are allowed to follow their religion and practice their culture. This
tolerance in Malaysia has always proved to be standout point and has kept the Malaysian
democracy in the right side of the tide up till now.
But, this government does not stand in favor of having powerful opposition and its
opinion lies in the fact that NGO’s and the opposition must be kept in check as they have the
capability to influence a large group of people and can endanger order of public peacefulness.
This can obstruct national development and a well planned society.
In Malaysia, any group or formation of activities or societies was known to be as a
political party. This word political was declared under the Societies act 1966. These political

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 7
societies were bound to be restricted after 1981 as a law was introduced specially formulated to
curb such groups. This law stated that, any political society was considered as a body or a group
that influences any activities or policies was not allowed to gain public power.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 8
THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE UNTITED KINGDOM
British citizens have different kind of right to freedom, i.e. the negative kind of freedom.
The expression of freedom and speech is under a common law in United Kingdom. Although
there is a good base of freedom in the country but still there are exceptions which include,
harassment, distress and alarming situations where the entire base of power is being questioned.
United Kingdom does have a national security issue which bounds their freedom to express
themselves freely. Any activity which is considered to be ill or against the public order and
disrupts peace amongst the public is hauled and not entertained in the country.
The federation and constitution is supposed to be respected and followed. Although the
UK has maintained to have an open and a large press system and environment inside the
boundaries of its country but still the use of surveillance and counterterrorism regulations by the
authorities have left a negative effect on the freedom of media and people’s views.
The political environment in the UK does not have any restrictions on the access of the
internet. It is rare to find any attacks on personalities on social media in the country. There are
some cases which have showed that journalists in the north have faced problems and
harassments. After the case of murder of a journalist who was researching on the investigations
of police, illegal armed races, the military and the drug selling gangs, it was found that even UK
is not safe for a person who wants to use his freedom of opinion and research.
UK has got a good and a firm tradition of broadcasting and as an example we can see the
BBC, which is supported by the public as well as the government. Hence, it is proved that United
Kingdom does have a reasonable and a good freedom of expression inside the country. UK is a

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 9
country with an unwritten law and constitution; here the laws come from a common practice of
international human rights legislations.
There have been positive changes and developments in the UK related to speech and
expression. U.K. has tough secrecy legislation and due to this, the interest of public in defense
was removed in the official secrets act and this was not replaced by any other law again.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 10
COMPARISON OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN MALAYSIA AND THE UNITED
KINGDOM
As we read above, freedom of speech in Malaysia has been complicated for years. The
democracy and the government are not different. Democracy of Malaysia is decided by the
government itself. The ruler or the person in power does not believe in giving absolute freedom
to the public. Formation of parties and oppositions is not allowed in Malaysia. It is believed that
a formation of group, an opposition or a NGO can use its power and influence people of the
country in a wrong way.
This case, when compared to the United Kingdom, it is believed that freedom of speech
in the UK has been better and much more expressive than in Malaysia. The UK might have
issues with the freedom of speech when it comes to defense or national security and terrorism but
expect that, media and the public force is given respect and a right to present their views.
The government in Malaysia is not involved in not supporting the democratic views and
criticism but that doesn’t mean they give the public, a chance to speak against their government,
against the racial rules and regulations, public order. They are not allowed to create any kind of
nuisance with the federation.
In Malaysia, rules are rigid as well as clear. Any person, who is found violating the
system, is punished without any statement of proof given to them. Basically, this is not called a
democracy still it has been accepted and followed since so many years of formation of
government in Malaysia.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 11
CONCLUSION
After going through the condition of Malaysia, it is proved that Malaysia is not one of the
countries which accept the strong liberalism factor approach in relation the freedom of
expression and speech. The working of Malaysia does not support the disagreement of
reasonable regulation. Malaysian government is trying hard to explain their kind of democracy
and their rules and regulations by proving the conclusion with the reasons of religious senilities,
issues of culture and speech of hatred to influence public. But it is still too difficult to understand
those arguments as limiting the political freedom for opposition has no valid reason for it.
Limiting civil society and opposition makes Malaysia a less democratic state.
We also discussed and compared the case of freedom in speech and expression with the situation
of The UK. In the UK, the situation is not as bad as it is in Malaysia. Because of the recent
incidents related to press and media and non presence of proper constitution, United Kingdom
has been into certain issues and problems but there is no such pressure of freedom of speech
experienced there. People support and are a part of press and media. And in today’s world press
and media are a form of public freedom.
The government of Malaysia is underling the freedom of speech and democratic processes by
restricting simple things like oppositions, NGO’s and public views. They have used the powers
and laws to strengthen themselves. The centralization of power has been applied by the
government and to avoid further issues, name of public order and religion nuisance are used.
THERE IS NO HALF DEMOCRACY. EITHER THERE IS DEMOCRACY OR IT IS NOT!

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 12
REFERENCES
Alatas, F. (1997). Democracy and authoritarianism in Indonesia and Malaysia. New York: St.
Martin's Press.
Democracy, media and law in malaysia and singapore a space for speech. (2016). [Place of
publication not identified]: Routledge.
Michael, J. (1983). Official information law in the United Kingdom. Government Publications
Review, [online] 10(1), pp.61-70. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0277-
9390(83)90028-6 [Accessed 26 Mar. 2017].
Ng, C. (n.d.). The Hazy New Dawn: Democracy, Women and Politics in Malaysia. SSRN
Electronic Journal. [online] Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1716586 [Accessed
26 Mar. 2017].
Poverty, Inequality, and Democracy. (2008). Journal of Democracy, [online] 19(4), pp.56-56.
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0027 [Accessed 26 Mar. 2017].
Sani, M. (2008). Freedom of Speech and Democracy in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Political
Science, [online] 16(1), pp.85-104. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02185370801962440 [Accessed 26 Mar. 2017].
The Huffington Post. (2014). Deteriorating Democracy in Malaysia. [online] Available at:
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4813259 [Accessed 26 Mar. 2017].
Von Vorys, K. (2015). Democracy Without Consensus. Princeton University Press.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH 13
Welsh, B. (1996). Attitudes toward Democracy in Malaysia: Challenges to the Regime?. Asian
Survey, [online] 36(9), pp.882-903. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2645537
[Accessed 26 Mar. 2017].