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

.

03 August 2014

Despite pro-Bumi policies, UN report shows inequality growth in Malaysia !


Sumber:
https://my.news.yahoo.com/despite-pro-bumi-policies-un-report-shows-inequality-112100716.html

Despite pro-Bumi policies, UN report shows inequality growing in Malaysia




KUALA LUMPUR, July 24 — Malaysia is seeing growing inequality among its poorest despite pro-Bumiputera affirmative action aimed at narrowing income gaps, with a United Nations report showing slowing consumption among the bottom 40 per cent of country.
The United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) 2014 Human Development Report that was released today showed that consumption growth in the group lagged the general population and was also behind China and Uganda, which were rated as experiencing high or rising disparity.
Aside from the growing inequality, the report also highlighted the unintended consequences of Malaysia’s pro-Bumiputera affirmative action policies in addressing inequality.
“Some observers have critiqued direct measures for being misguided and mismatched to the deeper structural problems that need to be addressed,” said the report.
“For example, the positive discrimination policies favouring the ethnic Malays, or Bumiputeras, in Malaysia over the dominant Chinese and minority Indian populations have improved their access to education and jobs and helped them more fully realise their economic potential.
“Yet Malaysia’s Chinese and Indian minority citizens chafe at 70 per cent quotas in university admissions, flocking instead to private and foreign schools and often staying away from the country,” the report added.
The report noted that approximately one million Malaysians have emigrated as of 2011, many of whom were ethnic Chinese and highly educated, and that the majority of skilled emigrants had cited social injustice as a reason for leaving the middle-income country.
The report will again place the spotlight on the efficacy of the government’s affirmative action programmes, which continue to expand despite criticism of their effectiveness in reaching those who most need the aid.
Last year, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced a revised New Economic Model (NEM) that provided the predominant Malay community access to over RM31 billion in aid and contracts, a move that critics said was a reversal of his promises to roll back race-based policies.
The Najib administration had previously pledged to gradually dismantle the defunct, but still enforced, pro-Bumiputera New Economic Policy (NEP), but had faced fierce resistance from Malay groups.
The UNDP report also placed Malaysia 62nd on the 2013 Human Development Index, far behind Singapore and Brunei that snagged the 9th and 30th spots respectively.
According to the report, Malaysia was ranked last year as a country with “high” human development, while Singapore and Brunei were deemed nations with “very high” human development.
Malaysia beat other southeast Asian neighbours on the 2013 ranking, such as Thailand (89), Indonesia (108), the Philippines (117), Vietnam (121) and Cambodia (136).
Norway was top of the list of 168 countries, while African countries emerging from long-term conflict or are still experiencing armed violence were ranked in the bottom tier.
In 2012, Malaysia was also ranked 62nd.
The Human Development Index is a measure of achievement in three basic areas of human development: a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living.
It measures life expectancy at birth, average years of schooling, expected years of schooling and gross national income per capita.
The report also included the Gender Inequality Index, where Malaysia ranked 39th last year.
In the developing country, women held only 13.9 per cent of seats in Parliament last year, while the female labour force participation rate was just 44.3 per cent in 2012.
Singapore fared better than Malaysia by scoring the 15th spot in the 2013 Gender Inequality Index. 
The Gender Inequality Index reflects inequality in achievement between women and men in three areas: reproductive health, empowerment and the labour market.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------



(Accessed on 03 August 2014)   


The Human Development Index - going beyond income
Norway, Australia and the Netherlands lead the Human Development Index (HDI) rankings in 2011, while the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Niger and Burundi are at the bottom.

Each year since 1990 the Human Development Report has published the Human Development Index (HDI) which was introduced as an alternative to conventional measures of national development. The HDI represents a broader definition of well-being and provides a composite measure of three basic dimensions of human development: healtheducation and income.

The latest HDI report is from 2011 with emphasis on Sustainability and Equity, titled: A Better Future for All. 
The three Human Development Indicators are: 1. Life Expectancy Index (LEI): Life expectancy at birth (in years); 2. Education Index (EI) Mean years of schooling (in years), and Expected years of schooling (in years), and 3. Income Index (II): Per capita income (PPP $).
Below is the list of countries with a "Very High Human Development" including Barbados (rank 47), followed by three countries with "High Human Development".

Definitions:
Human Development Index (HDI): A composite index measuring average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development-a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living. 

Life expectancy at birth: Number of years a newborn infant could expect to live if prevailing patterns of age-specific mortality rates at the time of birth stay the same throughout the infant's life. 

Mean years of schooling: Average number of years of education received by people ages 25 and older, converted from education attainment levels using official durations of each level. 
Expected years of schooling: Number of years of schooling that a child of school entrance age can expect to receive if prevailing patterns of age-specific enrolment rates persist throughout the child's life. 

Gross national income (GNI) per capita: Aggregate income of an economy generated by its production and its ownership of factors of production, less the incomes paid for the use of factors of production owned by the rest of the world, converted to international dollars using purchasing power parity (PPP) rates, divided by midyear population. 

GNI per capita rank minus HDI rank: Difference in rankings by GNI per capita and by the HDI. A negative value means that the country is better ranked by GNI than by the HDI. 

Nonincome HDI: Value of the HDI computed from the life expectancy and education indicators only.

For comparsion, the third table is the UN Human Development Report 2002 updated 2004.


Source: 
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX
The 2014 Human Development Report by the United Nations Development Program was released on July 24, 2014, and calculates HDI values based on estimates for 2013. Below is the list of the "very high human development" countries:[10]
Note: The green arrows (), red arrows (), and blue dashes () represent changes in rank when compared to the new 2013 data HDI for 2012 – published in the 2013 report.
1.    Norway 0.944 ()
2.    Australia 0.933 ()
3.     Switzerland 0.917 ( 6)
4.    Netherlands 0.915 ()
5.    United States 0.914 ( 2)
6.    Germany 0.911 ( 1)
7.    New Zealand 0.910 ( 1)
8.    Canada 0.902 ( 3)
9.    Singapore 0.901 ( 10)
10.  Denmark 0.900 ( 5)
11.  Ireland 0.899 ( 4)
12.  Sweden 0.898 ( 4)
13.  Iceland 0.895 ( 1)
14.  United Kingdom 0.892 ( 13)
15.  Hong Kong 0.891 ( 2)
16.  South Korea 0.891 ( 3)
17.  Japan 0.890 ( 7)
18.  Liechtenstein 0.889 ( 6)
19.  Israel 0.888 ( 3)
20.  France 0.884 ()
21.  Austria 0.881 ( 3)
22.  Belgium 0.881 ( 4)
23.  Luxembourg 0.881 ( 5)
24.  Finland 0.879 ( 3)
25.  Slovenia 0.874 ( 3)
26.  Italy 0.872 ( 1)
27.  Spain 0.869 ( 4)
28.  Czech Republic 0.861 ()
29.  Greece 0.853 ()
30.  Brunei Darussalam 0.852 ()
31.  Qatar 0.851 ( 5)
32.  Cyprus 0.845 ( 1)
33.  Estonia 0.840 ()
34.  Saudi Arabia 0.836 ( 23)
35.  Lithuania 0.834 ( 6)
36.  Poland 0.834 ( 4)
37.  Andorra 0.830 ( 3)
38.  Slovakia 0.830 ( 2)
39.  Malta 0.829 ( 7)
40.  United Arab Emirates 0.827 ( 2)
41.  Chile 0.822 ( 1)
42.  Portugal 0.822 ( 2)
43.  Hungary 0.818 ( 6)
44.  Bahrain 0.815 ( 4)
45.  Cuba 0.815 ( 14)
46.  Kuwait 0.814 ( 8)
47.  Croatia 0.812 ()
48.  Latvia 0.810 ( 3)
49.  Argentina 0.808 ( 4)