8/2/2019 Freedom of Expression _threats to Our Security

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/freedom-of-expression-threats-to-our-security 1/3

How advisable is it to allow freedom of expression when there are increasing threatsto our security?

Lum En-Ci (0834)

The freedom of expression, as one of the inalienable rights in the UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights, is synonymous with the ideals of any moderndemocratic society in the world. It allows individuals to have a public say in issuesthat affect them, and indirectly ensures that their other rights and interests aremaintained by the governing body. However not all individuals wield this rightresponsibly, and censorship, in the internet age where proliferation of newinformation technology means that a greater amount of people have a free platformto freely espouse their views, may be the necessary evil in order to maintain civicorder.

However, limiting the freedom of expression without discretion may lead to theinfringement of other rights, and disregards the safety and well-being of individuals

as well. Some societies abuse censorship laws for their own agenda, to maintain afaçade of power or to suppress a certain group of individuals. Contradictorily, bysuppressing views that threaten their authority, they often incite violence from thesuppressed group. Furthermore, it is within these oppressive societies ruled with anauthoritarian fist that many human rights abuses occur—and where the freedom toexpress on unmonitored channels provides a way for its citizens to show theinternational community the reality of their situation, and for them to begin takingaction towards ensuring their security.

Some may say that the freedom of expression may need to take a backseat in lieuof security threats like the internationalization of terrorism in today’s globalized world.

Countries are now no longer separate entities, but global communities. Withincreasing migration within and between countries, communities now comprise of adiverse range of peoples in terms of their nationality, race, religious affiliation and soon, As such, maintaining civic order in a more complex social fabric where aninnocent misunderstanding or insensitive behavior can easily spark tensionsbecomes a more difficult task. Unjustified claims and racial stereotyping in bothmainstream and independent media also perpetuate misunderstanding and tensionsbetween groups of people of different nationalities, races and beliefs. For instance,the misinformed view that perpetuated after the terrorist attacks in the United Statesafter September 11 was that any individual of the Islamic faith was a supporter of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. Furore on the internet and in the mainstream mediaspawned a spate of indiscriminate hate-crimes against Muslims in Western nations—which then gave Islamic governments like that of Iran even more fodder to paint theWest as the enemy, and more reason to take up nuclear arms to defend itself againstthat which is labelled a threat.

Hence censorship laws, imposed by the government and used with discretion,become a viable method to ensure that no material published in the media threatens

the racial and religious harmony of a nation. In the case of Singapore, a middle-agedChristian couple, Ong Kian Cheong and his wife Dorothy Chan, were charged under the Sedition Act and the Undesirable Publications Act for distributing seditiouspublications to two Muslim women in 2007. Where governments to be more lax,

inaction on its part may be construed as implicit discrimination and this underminesits authority to govern and to protect the rights of its citizens. Such tensions stressthe social fabric and may create an internal threat to security as well as making it

8/2/2019 Freedom of Expression _threats to Our Security

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/freedom-of-expression-threats-to-our-security 2/3

more susceptible to external threats. Therefore, a degree of censorship, curbingsome freedom to express is necessary when safeguarding a country’s security inrelation to a more complex world.

That said, censorship, when taken too far, is pure subterfuge. When governmentsor news agencies choose to clamp down on freedom of expression under the claimof maintaining civic order, the rights of certain individuals within the society may be atstake. Certain countries such as China censor online material, books, films andmagazines that oppose their Communist ideals or cast them in a negative light. Notonly do they control the freedom of expression of the general population—they holdan even tighter control over information by minority groups which have for yearsexpressed their dissatisfaction against their political and economic marginalization bystate policies. By censoring the freedom of expression for groups like the Uyghur minority in the tumultuous Xinjiang Autonomous Region in China, they are effectivelydenying them an equal chance in demanding their other rights. These result inincreased tensions between the government and the marginalized party, and, with

already limited outlets to express their grievances, the tension may escalade intoviolence, like the Ürümqi riots in 2009 which left hundreds of ethnic Han and Uyghur dead.Hence, when censorship and the limitation of free voice are used to undermineweighty problems, the problems are only perpetuated, not solved, and provesdetrimental in the long run to the security of a society or nation.

Freedom of expression—while unwieldy at times—is a means by which a socialbody ensures that its rights are maintained. In societies where human rights abusestake place, the freedom to express is even more imperative in order to get theinternational community to sit up and monitor the situation. In the case of the Iranian

Presidential elections where the unfavoured candidate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wasre-elected as president by a landslide victory, sparking allegations of vote-rigging,unhappy supporters of the opposition protested the election on the streets andonline. In a parallel to the 2007 anti-government protests by Burmese monks, theIranian government attempted a violent crack-down on protestors—all of which wascaptured through video or personal weblogs and posted online through proxy serverslocated outside the country, bypassing censorship. This constant stream of insider information was the life-line to the outside world as the country’s mainstream mediaalternated between media black-outs and distorted reporting that even resorted topoor photoshopping to maintain the illusion of the ruling party’s dominance. Thisallows the world and international communities like the United Nations to have amore rounded view of the situation, and for them to take action, in the form of 

warnings or sanctions against the nation to alleviate and stop the abuse of humanrights. Hence, the freedom of expression is a means to safeguard the lives of individuals, and the means to ensuring other human rights are met.

 In conclusion, limiting the freedom of expression is necessary in an increasingly

interconnected world where an increased diversity means that societies need to beeven more sensitive about remarks towards nationality, race and religion in order tosafeguard civic order. That said, censorship, when wielded for political self-gain,suppresses its citizens and can lead to tension and violence. Thus, the freedom of expression should be exercised within responsible and justifiable boundaries, withoutthe intent to cause misunderstanding and hatred, and simply so as to ensure thatother human rights are maintained.

8/2/2019 Freedom of Expression _threats to Our Security

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/freedom-of-expression-threats-to-our-security 3/3

Comments: An elaborated, coherent essay that not only demonstrates proficiency in language, but draws conclusions, makes arguments and supports them with examples, details, facts and reasons.