By Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye, Member of Unity Advisory Council
KOTA KINABALU: It has been reported in the media that the National Unity Ministry is considering the formulation of laws to regulate the spread of hateful speeches and statements as well as introducing special programs to educate journalists and others on this important question.
Its intention in doing so is noble.
Laws against hate speech can foster a more inclusive and tolerant society by discouraging discriminatory language and actions.
Such laws can provide legal recourse for marginalised communities, helping to protect them from verbal abuse and incitement to violence.
By addressing hate speech, the government may reduce the potential for hate crimes, thereby promoting public safety and social harmony.
But the question that arises is this: Why only target journalists and media managers?
Journalists merely report speeches made by others, notably politicians.
Shouldn’t therefore politicians be the target group for education and re-education?
Politicians often have significant influence in society. If they are equipped with a better understanding of hate speech and its implications, they can set positive examples for the public.
For that matter, how about applying similar lessons to those in other professions too? What about recalcitrant lawyers, doctors, engineers, and teachers—just to name a few.
Having professionals from diverse fields educated together can foster collaboration, ensuring that various perspectives are considered when addressing national issues.
So, the thrust must be to stem hate speeches at the source and not the conduit, i.e., the journalists’ organisation.
Journalists in the mainstream media have been rather responsible. I know that in the past, newspapers in all the language media have practiced self-censorship when they came across occasions when hate speeches were delivered.
But nowadays, when hate speeches appear in some social media, the perpetrators were not professionally trained journalists but others.
While the Unity Ministry’s intention was good, we must also be aware of any potential for abuse where laws may be used to censor legitimate speech or criticism of government or stifle freedom of expression.
Enforcing such laws can be complex, especially in a multicultural, multi-religious society where diverse interpretations of speech may exist.
