Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Libel

In my remonstrations against The Malaysian Insider @ The Malaysian Instigator, like Rodin, it bewildered me how this portal could continue to disseminate unfettered news and columns that bordered on or could considered to be seditious or libelous.

TMI cannot deny that while it publishes comments pro-establishment, their anti-establishment and pro-opposition stance and inclination to the point of slanting and misdirected reports/columns to satisfy their rabid mouth frothing opposition readers, it's impartiality and credibility is questionable.

In his post, blogger BigDog had called for the another opposition infested portal, Malaysiakini, to be investigated for possible sedition.

Similarly, TMI's extreme opposition proclivities prompted me to to point out the seditious nature of one of it's columns, an offence punishable under the Sedition Act 1948 cited by BigDog.

I even highlighted a similar attack on the PDRM in the context of that column having a seditious tendency as described by the Act,
"Today we are still saddled with a questionable police force.."
Coming back to my astonishment, I can only conclude the powers that be are tolerant to these blatant transgressions due to:

1) The Govt's commitment to a free internet environment as per the Bill of Guarantee No. 7: To ensure no censorship of the Internet.

and most amazingly in the case of libel, though I admit I may be wrong,

2) There is no protection for anyone or body being libelled in an online content as interpreted by the DEFAMATION ACT 1957. Provisions which does not include internet online content and a jaga kereta shield 211 (1) (2) of the COMMUNICATIONS AND MULTIMEDIA Act.

No comments: