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

.

12 March 2021

Najib slams new RM10,000 fine for not seeing difference between serious, accidental offences !!

SOURCE: https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2021/03/12/najib-slams-new-rm10000-fine-for-not-seeing-difference-between-serious-acci/1957170?utm_source=izooto&utm_medium=push_notifications&utm_campaign=RM10,000%20fine Najib slams new RM10,000 fine for not seeing difference between serious, accidental offences Friday, 12 Mar 2021 11:36 AM MYT BY EMMANUEL SANTA MARIA CHIN
Datuk Seri Najib Razak explained that actions as simple as forgetting to check-in with the MySejahtera QR code would also be subjected to the RM10,000 compound being stated in the summon issued by authorities. — Picture by Firdaus Latif KUALA LUMPUR, March 12 — Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has taken a dig at his ally Perikatan Nasional’s government, this time over the insensitivity of provisions within the newly amended Emergency Ordinance 2021 towards accidental or unintentional offences. The Pekan MP, through a Facebook post, explained that actions as simple as forgetting to check-in with the MySejahtera QR code would also be subjected to the RM10,000 compound being stated in the summon issued by authorities. Attached within his post was a picture of a compound written for RM10,000 issued yesterday at a location in Bukit Jalil, with the offence listed as failing to scan the MySejahtera QR code. “The manner the Ordinance was outlined by the government does not differentiate between unintentional and non-serious offences like forgetting or failing to scan the MySejahtera app, or failing to use a face mask, against serious offences like breaching mandatory quarantines or crossing state lines without permission,” he wrote in his post. Najib also admonished the administration when he said these are the effects of laws being passed without going through proper checks and balances. “This is an example of why government policies should be discussed and passed by the Dewan Rakyat beforehand to ensure they are fair to the people,” he wrote. Provisions within the Emergency (Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases) (Amendment) Ordinance 2021 states that a person found breaching movement control order SOPs is subject to a fine compoundable up to a sum of RM10,000, a tenfold increase from the previous maximum compound value of RM1,000. However, yesterday, Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Bador clarified that first-time offenders or those caught for minor offences could argue their case with the district health officers and are not necessarily made to pay the full RM10,000 fine. Abdul Hamid had explained the maximum fine of RM10,000 would most likely be imposed on serious offenders, like those caught crossing state lines and end up causing new Covid-19 clusters or entertainment outlet owners who operate despite being on the negative activity list. The top cop had said that the final compound amount would be decided at the discretion of the district health officers and not the police. .
Posted by at