Making Enemies Of The State

People suggest that we live in a time when access to information and the ability to freely speak out has advanced to a point where constraint of these freedoms barely exists. Actions taken by various governments over the last 20 years might prove you wrong.

China, North Korea and the other repressive governments are quite well known due to actions taken by them to suppress any dissent which questions their right to rule be it denial of civil and human rights or the censorship of information. Those governments aren’t the only ones working to prevent the free flow of information. Supposed nations that call themselves democratic and or democracies have instituted laws which authoritarian governments would have embraced with a full and loving heart.

Following the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington on September 11 2001 the United States House of Representatives with the U.S. Senate passed the USA Patriot Act out of complete paranoia and fear. Among the wonderful things this law allowed was Warrantless Wiretaps and Warrantless Searches except that under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution these two acts should be unconstitutional but thanks to the United States Congress, the Bush and Obama administrations the Fourth Amendment doesn’t seem to exist.


The government of Singapore uses various means and methods to stifle dissent, but their biggest weapon is the judicial system. Having co-opted its judiciary government officials will file libel and slander suits against those seen as threats to their power. What follows is your basic show trail in which the defendant is naturally found guilty then they are handed a substantial monetary fine which couldn’t possibly be remitted to the plaintiff thus the offending party is jailed.

Now the country’s long-time rulers, the leaders of the People’s Action Party, are attempting to use trademark infringement claims to identify anonymous critics and to squelch oppositional speech. So far as can be determined, despite the fact that the government keeps a tight leash on the mainstream media, it appears to be the first time the island republic has gone after an Internet publication although the opposition Singapore Democratic Party delivers a steady diet of anti-government rhetoric over the Net and an incessant stream of angry bloggers deliver up daily fare.

Like the U.S. Malaysia decided it needed a more draconian means to squash dissent following the September 11 attacks. So the Internal Security Act was created.

Malaysia's Internal Security Act (ISA) is a preventive detention law originally enacted in the early 1960s during a national state of emergency as a temporary measure to fight a communist rebellion. Under Section 73 (1) of the ISA, police may detain any person for up to 60 days, without warrant or trial and without access to legal counsel, on suspicion that "he has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof." After 60 days, the Minister of Home Affairs can then extend the period of detention without trial for up to two years, without submitting any evidence for review by the courts, by issuing a detention order, which is renewable indefinitely.

The name alone Internal Security Act sounds like a law the straight from the Soviet Union.

Korea has the National Security Act which was used by its military dictatorship to completely suppress any and all opposition. For example it made the Communist party illegal. It allows the government to declare any group or organization illegal.

The easiest to violate are Article 7 Clause 3 (Creation, Importation, Copying, Possession, Transportation, Distribution, and Selling of "Enemy's Expressions") and Article 10. (Knowingly not reporting violations to some articles). The South Korean High Court has a ruling history since 1978 that has classified 1,220 books and print material as "Enemy's Expressions" by force of precedence.
Two state-established Research Institutes decide what books and print material meet the criteria of "Enemy's Expressions": the Democratic Ideology Institute, established in 1997 and under the direct orders of the Chief Prosecutor, and the Public Safety Affairs Institute of the Korea National Police University.
However, since early 1990s, the Public Prosecutor's Office has chosen not to bring any citizens (or publishers) to the courts for what's deemed by common sense as not risky. Courts still invoke the law when increasing fines or years in prison for political charges against what the South Korean State deems subversive groups.

Governments may not like dissent but without it how does a nation survive or grow. Overcoming problems which may seem insurmountable can through open dialog and healthy debate create a climate of improved governance rather than one which seeks to regress.