FREEDOM OF SPEECH / FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION


FREEDOM OF SPEECH / FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship and/or limitation. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used [United Nations, 1966, 1976]. The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR recognizes the right to freedom of speech as "the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression". Furthermore freedom of speech is recognized in European, inter-American and African regional human rights law [United Nations, 1966, 1967]. Freedom of speech, or the freedom of expression, is recognized in international and regional human rights law. The right is enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights [Andrew Puddephatt & Hodder Arnold, 2005; Kumar, Ambika, 2006].

In Islamic ethics freedom of speech was first declared in the Rashidun period by the caliph Umar in the 7th century. In the Abbasid Caliphate period, freedom of speech was also declared by al-Hashimi (a cousin of Caliph al-Ma'mun) in a letter to one of the religious opponents he was attempting to convert through reason.

According to George Makdisi and Hugh Goddard, "the idea of academic freedom" in universities was "modelled on Islamic custom" as practiced in the medieval Madrasah system from the 9th century. Islamic influence was "certainly discernible in the foundation of the first deliberately-planned university" in Europe [Boisard, Marcel A., 1980].

* Selected REFERENCES / Sources:


Amnesty International: Annual Reports: URLhttp://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/index.html Andrew Puddephatt & Hodder Arnold. (2005). Freedom of Expression: The Essentials of Human Rights. United Publishers. Boisard, Marcel A. (July 1980), "On the Probable Influence of Islam on Western Public and International Law", International Journal of Middle East Studies 11 (4): 429–50. Goddard, Hugh. (2000). A History of Christian-Muslim Relations. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Kumar, Ambika. (2006). ‘Using Courts to Enforce the Free Speech Provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.’ Published by Chicago Journal of International Law. Summer 2006. URLhttp://www.allbusiness.com/corporate-governance/4082846-1.html United Nations: ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.’ Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16th December 1966: Entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49. URLhttp://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm (United Nations) Wikipedia. (2010). ‘Freedom of Speech.’ Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. URLhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_expression

.

13 February 2012

1CARE Malaysia ?!




1Care: Care to explain?

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2012 - 17:00
by Terence Fernandez

WHY would the government push such an unpopular scheme like the 1Care health plan down our throats so close to elections? This was the question I texted Health Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai on Friday night.

The minister and MCA No 2 promptly responded that it was not a done deal and the consultation process was still ongoing.

Then why, I asked, did the National Health Financing Unit deputy director Dr Rozita Halina Hussein tell the media during a Thursday briefing that 1Care was mandatory; only the quantum that Malaysians would have to pay for the scheme was still being deliberated?

Liow responded: “It's only mandatory if we accept one of the models presented ... will clarify.” He added that the media was “not given the full picture”. Now we are told its implementation is pushed to 2014.

Communication, it seems have always been the bane of officialdom. Why is it so difficult to present crisp, clear information? Why is it that more often than not, there is always a retraction or, in the case of the Health Ministry a need for a “clarification” when what comes out of the mouths of officials only give rise to more questions, concerns and boiling temperatures of stakeholders — in this case, the taxpayers.

We saw this similar reaction from Auditor-General (AG) Tan Sri Ambrin Buang over the National Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp) issue when over a month after making his remarks in the annual AG's Report did he come out to “clarify” he never said the feedlot was in a mess, reasoning he felt compelled to voice his “clarification” as his staff had come under fire.

By then the damage had already been done and as we know now, the NFCorp is an unstoppable train.

With millions being spent annually on hiring communications consultants and outsourcing public relations work to the private sector, we wonder why is it that information — a great commodity in this day and age — still have the tendency of being misinterpreted or having the message totally misunderstood. Sometimes — as in the case of 1Care, it seems that even the information is wrong.

Then there is the question of why we still have a public relations department in most government agencies and ministries, with full-time staff. But we'll leave that for another day.

A few years ago I gave a presentation on communications and the media to senior government officials including Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan, the (then) director-general of Public Service Tan Sri Ismail Adam and (then) Housing Ministry secretary-general Datuk Seri (now Tan Sri) Ahmad Fuad Ismail.

My presentation was brief: If you yourself are unsure about what to say, then don't say anything at all. And never say “no comment” due to its negative implications. If you are only allowed to say so much, say so and explain why: “We are still discussing and we do not have full details yet, but we are talking to all stakeholders. Nothing is definite.”

This should have been the message given by the Health Ministry.

Now, the government is seen to be reacting to negative reaction following 1Care and falling over itself to salvage the people's confidence. 1Care after all — with all it's perceived good intentions and benefits — comes at a bad time — what with the NFCorp issue and the RM1.5 billion loan from the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to fund the PR1MA My First Home Scheme.

The fact that government spending in healthcare is below the recommended World Health Organisation's (WHO) budget — as explained by some detractors is also a question that the government does not immediately have answers to.

If it wants to shove such controversial policies down our throats, the government must be prepared to open the books and be forthright with ancillary questions:

Where is the RM11 billion in annual healthcare spending going? Why is there a cartel of sorts controlling our pharmaceuticals when an open market system would mean cheaper healthcare? Why are there many government hospitals but they lack equipment? Why is there still a long queue for consultation and prescriptions and a long waiting list for the use of equipment such as basic scanners and MRIs? Why are we losing many good doctors and top healthcare staff to other countries? Why should one be compelled to contribute to 1Care when one has medical insurance that gives him or her top-notch private healthcare? Just who are the 12 or so individuals/companies that have submitted proposals?

It is pertinent that there are answers to these questions if our take-home pay is going to be much less and the people would want to know who ultimately benefits — the rakyat or a few Sendirian Berhads which are going to be laughing all the way to the bank.

Now that is bound to make one sick to the stomach!


By: Terence, managing editor (news)
Twitter at @TerenceFnandez