Teresa Kok

Press Statement by YB Teresa Kok, MP for Seputeh on 29th June 2006 at Kuala Lumpur

WAMI Should Learn More About The Operation And Reality In Malaysian Parliament Before Making Criticism

I read the statement issued by Writer Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI) with regret. The statement shows the lack of understanding towards the reality in the Malaysian Parliament by the WAMI secretariat and key personnel. I am making this statement in the capacity as the DAP Parliamentary Caucus Secretary to clarify certain misconceptions in the WAMI’s statement.

Firstly, there is confusion between a Parliamentary Select Committee and a Parliamentary Caucus. A Parliamentary Select Committee is established by a motion by the House and fully represents Parliament. A Parliamentary Caucus is a loose and unofficial grouping of MPs, and apart from the DAP Parliamentary Caucus, it refers to a grouping of like-minded cross-party MPs on a common issue.

So far, three such parliamentary caucuses with cross-party representation had been formed – the Burma and Human Rights Caucuses. The South Thailand Caucus was stillborn.

The WAMI’s statement started with the call for 9 MPs to form the Parliamentary Media Freedom Caucus since the Select Committee of Media Freedom failed to be established. The 9 MPs mentioned in the statement is based on an interview published in Merdeka Review, an online media on May 22, 2006.

The question is, how can WAMI single-out these 9 MPs as the only MPs that support the formation of Media Freedom Caucus in the Parliament? How about many other MPs who have not been interviewed by Merdeka Review? I dare to say most MPs from opposition parties are supportive of the idea of forming a Parliamentary Media Freedom Caucus as we are the victims of media control and censorship policy of BN government.

A BN backbencher who expresses support for the formation of the Parliamentary Media Caucus does not mean commitment to join the caucus or be active in its activities.

These are our painful experiences in the formation and functioning of the Burma Caucus and the Human Rights Caucus. We have tried very hard to get BN MPs to participate actively in its activities, but their responses have not been encouraging.

Probably, BN MPs are hesitant to participate in these two caucuses as both of them touch on sensitive issues and they are not sure how far they can go in voicing out their concern on ASEAN and Malaysian’s policy on Burma, as well as on human rights. On the Human Rights Caucus, PAS MP Salahuddin even withdrew from the caucus after the caucus showed support to rights groups that protested against Moral Policing last year.

A few women NGOs have been encouraging and persuading the women MPs to form a multi-party Women MPs Caucus since last year to address various issues related to women. The handful of women MPs have agreed to it but it has not been able to take off.

The issue-oriented cross-party parliamentary caucus was initiated by DAP MPs and we support the formation of other issue-oriented caucuses, including the Media Freedom Caucus, but it must be a cross-party caucus and not end up as a DAP or opposition caucus in view of the puny opposition representation.

Are there BN MPs who are prepared to join in the formation of the Parliamentary Media Freedom Caucus and to take active part in its activities? If there is not a single BN MP who is prepared to do so, then the most elementary condition for a formation of a cross-party issue-oriented parliamentary caucus does not exist.

The WAMI statement said, “WAMI regrets to note that none of the select committees proposed and motions moved (as highlighted by Mr Lim) would be on media freedom. From hindsight, DAP’s disinterest in media freedom is unfortunate now that a call-in programme in the state-run Chinese radio station Ai-FM will be axed because of being critical to the Deputy Minister of Education.”

Media freedom is part of human rights. When the Parliamentary Opposition Leader proposes a parliamentary select committee on human rights, it would have ambit to cover media freedom. When it is not even possible to secure BN support for the formation of a parliamentary select committee on human rights, it is premature to talk about the further subdivision of human rights as to have a parliamentary select committee on media freedom.

I am saddened by the WAMI statement which described the DAP as “disinterested” in media freedom just because the party has not proposed the formation of Select Committee on Media Freedom. This is most unfair.

Members of WAMI should know that DAP had always been in the vanguard in and out of Parliament to champion media freedom. We are ourselves a victim of media control and censorship suffering constant media black-out of DAP statements and speeches.

Lastly, WAMI being a writer alliance that comprised many well known writers and intellectuals, I hope it can learn to be sensible and tactful in its statements and stands on the issue of media freedom. WAMI should know who is its friend and who is its enemy. It shouldn’t simply launch attacks on friends before it finds out the reality of the situation, it also needs to learn to be fair and sensible in its statement, so that it doesn’t antagonize more friendly organization and personalities and destroy the unity of all victims of media freedom.

Teresa Kok
Secretary of DAP Parliamentary Caucus

民主行动党国会党团秘书及士布爹区国会议员郭素沁于2006年6月28日在吉隆坡发表文告：

回应维护媒体独立撰稿人联盟(WAMI)文告：敬请先调查后发言

本人谨以民主行动党国会党团秘书身份回应维护媒体独立撰稿人联盟(以下简称“WAMI”)的文告。有关文告对马来西亚国会的实际运作情况欠缺理解和调查，一口断言行动党对媒体自由“冷漠”(disinterest)，令人深感遗憾。

首先，我要先厘清「国会特选委员会」(Select Committee)与「国会论坛」(或译“国会议员连线”, caucus)，是不同的。国会特选委员会是经由国会动议而成立，并且代表国会行使权力。国会论坛则是由对特定课题持有相同看法的國會議員成立的跨党派的非正式组织。

截至目前为止，大馬國會共有三个国会跨党派论坛，包括缅甸和人权论坛。泰南论坛则至今仍没运作。

WAMI根据5月22日《独立新闻在线》的访问，要求9位当时受访并支持成立媒体自由国会特选委员会的议员，在无法特选委员会的情况下成立国会跨党派论坛。問題是，WAMI為何只點名那9位國會议员呢？為何不包括其他沒被《独立新闻在线》访问的議員呢？我敢言9人以外，大多数在野黨议员都支持成立媒体自由国会跨党派论坛，因为我们都是国阵媒体垄断和控制下的受害者。反之，国阵议员就算表示支持成立论坛，這并不表示他会加入或积极参与活动。

这正是我们在成立缅甸论坛和人权论坛后所面对的困境。我们极尽全力拉拢国阵议员参与论坛活动，但是反应并不好。

也许，大部分国阵议员基于上述两个论坛涉及敏感议题而对其活动怯步。他们不确定国阵容許他们对东盟外交政策（缅甸）或人权事务发表看法的尺度。此外，回教党议员沙拉胡丁更在人权论坛支持国内人权组织抗议“道德警察”后，选择退出該论坛。

去年，数个妇女非政府组织曾积极游说女性国会议员成立国会跨党派女性议员论坛，讨论妇女议题。女议员們基本上同意這慨念，但是遺憾的是，該論壇至今因着某些因素還遲遲未成立，由此可見成立跨黨派論壇的不易。

行动党是议题跨党派论坛的始作俑者，我们理所当然支持成立更多的议题导向论坛，包括媒体自由论坛。然而，我們必須認清的是，由于在野黨人數稀少，任何将发挥影响力的论坛，必须是跨党派、跨越朝野政黨的论坛，以免沦为“行动党论坛”或“反对党论坛”。

试问多少位国阵议员准备加入国会媒体自由论坛，并且积极参与其活动？如果没有任何国阵议员准备加入，那么成立跨党派论坛的最低条件便不存在了。

WAMI文告指出，“WAMI遗憾林吉祥（向政府）建议成立的特选委员会当中，竟无一是关系新闻自由。后见之明，在国营华语电台爱FM“爱•开麦•无障碍”节目被腰斩之后，行动党对新闻自由的冷漠显得何其不幸。”

我們必須認清一點是，国会反对党领袖倡议成立的人权特选委员会，人權的范畴也包括媒体自由。当我们无法获得国阵（国会多数党）的同意成立人权特选委员会，要高谈成立媒体自由特選委員會，显然言之过早。

我对WAMI文告里就行动党本期国会议程当中没有列明媒体自由特选委员会而大做文章，指行动党对媒体自由议题“冷漠”，感到非常难过和遗憾。

WAMI同仁应该清楚民主行动党在国会内外争取和维护媒体自由的承诺与纪录，因為行动党也是国阵媒体控制和垄断的受害者，我們没理由不捍衛媒体自由。

作为云集著名专栏作者与知识分子的组织，WAMI在发言或进行游说工作时，应该更为切合实际情況与作出周详的考量。WAMI至少应该在争取媒体自由斗爭的战线上，分清楚WAMI孰敵孰友，而非在不了解实际情况就敌我不分乱劍横扫，无端伤害戰友的感受，而破壞戰友同志斗爭上的團結。

郭素沁
民主行动党国会党团秘书