MARCH 27 — Countries around the world are busy putting together their versions of laws which criminalise what is termed as “fake news”. We are not unique.
Rooted in the argument of national security, Indonesia began this year by setting up an agency tasked to tackle terrorist and extremist networks operating in cyberspace and to combat online extremism and hate speech. Its mandate also includes dealing with fake news on social media. “We will control cyberspace,” said the head of the agency.
In Singapore, a parliamentary select committee has been convened to hold public hearings to solicit informed opinion regarding the implications of enacting laws to prevent, combat and punish online falsehoods. Apparently, around seventy people were called to speak before the committee. The latter has been tasked with providing a report to lawmakers.
Malaysians might be cynical and sceptical regarding the consultative approach that the Singaporean government has undertaken. But at least these public hearings allow for debate and discussion of such legislation and solicit inputs from stakeholders allowing for informed and learned opinion, beyond just that of government, to help shape policy.
Malaysia’s approach?
Like most of our laws which are often crafted by a small group of people in the hallowed cubicles of the Attorney General’s Chambers in Putrajaya, they seem to only see the light of day when the Bills land on tables in the Dewan Rakyat. Parliamentarians are expected to somehow absorb its contents via osmosis, fully understand, debate and vote on days later.
There is no public consultation, no select committee hearings and no opportunity for civil society and industry stakeholders to provide learned and informed opinion.
This bill, like many others in the past, is expected to be passed, as the majority of backbenchers close their eyes to the written text and vote yes in support.
Much has been said about what could happen if this Bill is passed.
The fact is that crying out fake news has become the easy way for people to cast doubt on stories and issues they don’t like. It is a lazy and harmful approach to avoid debate and confrontation. It is also anti-intellectualism.
Even academicians, researchers and analysts projecting and publishing their findings, opinions, views and analysis at home and abroad could and will fall victim to this proposed law.
How do we analyse and discuss conditions and situations which require objectivity, critical thinking and rigorous questioning, when we are terrified of being wrong as those errors are now subject to criminal prosecution under the broad definition of the law. Even in the best of times, we can get predictions and published analysis wrong. After all, we are only human.
Academic freedom will be further eroded and most importantly, the right to debate, argue and take a public position, will be severely degraded as people worry what the consequences of that could lead to. How do you publish?
A knowledge based economy requires a population brought up on being able to be critical, solve problems, dive into research, encourage and appreciate original thinking. We should encourage people to be bold and take risks.
Galileo Galilei was actually accused of peddling fake news by the Roman Catholic Inquisition in 1633. He supported heliocentrism, an astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the Sun at the centre of the solar system, as opposed to the Earth being the the centre of the universe. It contradicted the established and accepted view by the Roman Catholic Church. For that, he was tried and condemned of heresy, and sentenced to indefinite imprisonment until his death in 1642.
It seems we might not have progressed very far from the days of Galileo.
This proposed Anti-Fake News law, and others like it, stunts and necrotises intellectualism. It will cultivate and reward mediocrity and punishe people who think out the box. It discourages norms and established knowledge from being challenged and questioned.
You can kiss goodbye to Malaysia’s ability to fully participate and benefit from the much talked about Fourth Industrial Revolution. Only a privileged few will be able to partake.
This bill could also very well deliver the final blow to our sense of humour, which was already facing considerable challenges to begin with. Fans of home-grown satire and humour sites such as the Tapir Times and Cilisos; of cartoonists such as Fahmi Reza and Zunar; of stand-up comedians like Prakash Daniels and Jason Leong; should start planning to enjoy their art and performances outside of the country.
Oh, but wait a minute, Big Brother has already thought of that as the Bill also includes a clause which can also punish you for alleged acts done overseas.
Let us be clear. The uncertainty & arbitrariness of this legislation will victimise people, and be vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. As we saw with the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012, it is not an issue of if but when that will happen.
Like George Orwell’s Ministry of Truth in his novel 1984, the operationalisation of this legislation will most likely require the setting up of new institutions tasked to serve the beast. New jobs and employment opportunities in government service to be the sword and the shield of the state.
I suppose at least this way, we can deal with the problem of unemployment. Too bad about our civil liberties, the freedom to express and dissent, discuss, debate, laugh at ourselves and at each other, and encouraging intellectual discussion.
Big Brother will decide for you what is right and wrong, what is permitted and not permitted, what is true or not true. Your own judgement, ability to think and be critical are not strengths. They are liabilities.
In the end, to protect ourselves, loved ones and communities from persecution and prosecution from the state, we will be forced to live an Orwellian truism: Ignorance is strength.
Is that the future that we want?
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
