Promoting press freedom in a society that believes in control and self-censorship is no easy task. It is not just about the government controlling the press through legislation but also about the public deciding what they want.

As advocates of the free press fail to understand fully the society they want to change, most take a shortcut, blaming everything on the government and the laws that curtail the freedom of press. These advocates also tend to point the finger in one direction — the government-controlled media — but they always turn a blind eye on the alternative press.

Yes, the laws infringed many rights of journalists to carry out their duty without favour or fear. Yes, editorial policies are determined by the owners closely linked with the authorities. Yet the alternative presses, be they conservative or otherwise, have followed the same strict rules — usually self-imposed in the name of religious or moral values.

All parties — the government, political parties, media owners and practitioners and the readers/audience — have set the determined boundaries. While crying out for more freedom, the public especially demands that news and features to be based within the limits of "eastern values".

Recently, Harakah chief editor Zulkifli Sulong presented a paper "Promoting press freedom in post-conflict situation" at a World Press Freedom Day forum in Kuala Lumpur. He began by explaining that while Harakah Islamic party PAS' organ, the fortnightly publication could still exercise freedom to publish as it pleases "as long as it conforms to Islamic policy".

'Rubber band' freedom

He writes: "For Harakah, freedom is not rigid but elastic in nature. This means Harakah is expected to practise freedom in expressing opinion as long as it is within the framework of Islamic freedom. Maybe it is better for me to use word 'rubber band' here just to give some indication of the freedom that we enjoy.

"Of course, people will question the legitimacy of this freedom but in real life, freedom is always subjected to certain permissible limits. Should there be no limit at all then the rubber band will burst and chaos will prevail. Although we are born free yet in life we are all regulated by conditions and rules. When we are driving in the streets for example, our movement is always controlled by traffic lights. Therefore in Islam, in whatever we do, we are subjected to conditions as enshrined in the Holy Quran and the Hadith."

Zulkifli was as honest as any editor could be. For him, freedom must be within a certain limit. In his case, religion sets the limit.

The question is what is the difference between his views and those of the mainstream media editors? While the government has never been as explicit on the issue of religion, when it comes to press freedom, it has made it clear that religion, ethnic relations and power determine the kinds of laws enacted to protect 'press freedom' in the country.

Limited form

Come to think of it, which political party calls for true press freedom — at least based on all articles of the United Nations' Declaration of Human Rights, the basic tenets of Malaysia's Federal Constitution and even the Malaysian Charter 2000, a citizens' initiative to push for media freedom? Every political leader plays the same game — yes we want freedom but it must be in a limited form. Who then determines the limits?

Hence, when Zulkifli argued that while freedom must be limited, but oppressive laws such as the Printing Presses and Publications Act and Official Secrets Act should not exist, he was again arguing within the determined boundaries.

It can be argued that if PAS were in power, the so-called oppressive laws may be abolished. Yet there would be new laws, this time based on the principles of Quran and Hadith as determined by the party's religious scholars, enacted to ensure freedom is within the boundaries of Islam.

The tendency to curb freedom could already be seen in the states of Kelantan and Terengganu, whether in gender segregating at payment counters in supermarkets, banning Malay performance arts such as Wayang Kulit, Makyong and Main Puteri, prohibiting bikinis on the beach (covering both local non-Muslims and foreign tourists) and 'covering' women's hair in all forms of advertisements.

Attitude towards freedom

PAS is the leader of the opposition coalition Barisan Alternatif. If BA takes over the government, should anyone be surprised if 'press freedom' would be within the same limits as it is now?

This is not to say Islam frowns on freedom but if no Muslim protested against PAS rulings on civil liberties and personal freedom, that could reflect the attitude of Muslims towards freedom.

Kelantan Mentri Besar Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat recently blamed the media for the increasing number of Kelantanese Muslims drinking and getting drunk in public, despite claiming the success of 'Islamic governance' in the state after more than a decade of PAS rule.

The PAS spiritual leader's excuse is not new. Blaming the media for trying to ape the West had been the most popular argument against press freedom, both by the ruling parties and the opposition.

It was not surprising then when Information Ministry parliamentary secretary Zainuddin Maidin, popularly called Zam, reminded the local media not be influenced by foreign media whose agenda was to re-colonise the country. The former group chief editor of Utusan Malaysia even warned the media practitioners not to allow themselves to become "dogs of western imperialism".

Culture of blame

Speaking at a different press freedom forum recently, Zam also shared the view that there was no such thing total press freedom, stating that such a situation "would harm the country and pave the way for foreign elements to jeopardise Malaysia's prosperity".

The culture of blaming others has been deeply rooted in society. But the real issue has yet to be resolved. Press freedom remains an ideal and most media practitioners even believe they are committed to the concept and practice, albeit within the determined boundaries. Harakah's Zulkifli too believes that the party organ is practising press freedom.

Veteran journalist Mazlan Nordin describes the situation — about press freedom and conflict of interest:

"Perhaps this conflict of interest which is inherent in societies is undergoing metamorphosis under pressure created by the society, monopoly, governments, extremism, religious fanaticism and no less, by journalists themselves, through self-censorship."

Up to the public

It would be naive for anyone to think that by lifting all the restrictions, Malaysians would enjoy press freedom. Even if government leaders were willing to do something about it, with the support of the opposition and the press freedom advocates, it is entirely up to the public to accept such changes.

Another veteran journalist Said Zahari made a better observation: "Press freedom is not totally dependent on the government but involves the company which owns the paper, as well as the journalists and readers."

Knowing the journalists, most of them are ready to adopt changes. The media owners too are more than willing to accept new things as long as there is potential for more profit. The government too, despite allegations of being anti-press freedom, may have to change if the population's cry for reform is strong.

However, if the readers — that is, the people — are still unwilling to let the floodgates open, press freedom will always remain a dream.