Caslon Analytics elephant logo title for Sedition note
home | about | site use | resources | publications | timeline   spacer graphic   Ketupa

overview

concepts

Australia

UK

Canada

US

Europe

elsewhere

cases

online


blacklists

mutiny

landmarks














related pages icon
related
Guides:


Free speech & censorship

Hatespeech
& politics


Governance

Security
& InfoCrime








related pages icon
related
Profiles:


Flag burning

Surveillance

section heading icon     elsewhere

This page discusses other sedition regimes

It covers -

As with the preceding page it supplements the discussion elsewhere on this site of censorship and hatespeech.

subsection heading icon    
Asia and Africa

States in Asia and Africa have recurrently deployed sedition and security legislation that derives from their UK and French colonial heritage. Those regimes but omits acontemporary constraints.

Gambian law, for example, chills an independent press through prison terms for reporters found guilty of sedition - broadly defined - or libel and a requirement that newspaper proprietors must sign a US$16,600 bond (with their houses as guarantees) to be allowed to publish.

In 2008 UK missionaries David and Fiona Fulton were sentenced to a year's hard labour in a Gambian prison over "seditious" email to friends in London describing the latest Gambian President as a madman. They were also fined £6,250 each. They pleaded guilty to charges of "printing, publishing or reproducing publications with intent to bring hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the president or the government".

Malaysia and Singapore have both made active use of sedition/anti-terrorism legislation to silence internal political dissent and online expression. Chinese law and practice features substantial restrictions against criticism of the Communist Party and against statements by/for the Falun Gong sect.

Law in the Hong Kong SAR melds UK and PRC rigour. The Crimes Ordinance for example deals with "acts done with a seditious intent, the uttering of seditious words, dealing with seditious publication or the possession of such publications". Sedition encompasses an intent to counsel disobedience to law or to any lawful order, or to raise discontent or disaffection among Hong Kong inhabitants. Substantive effects are not required for prosecution, with courts instead considering the defendant's words have a tendency to incite disobedience or discontent rather than an intent to incite violence. A 'seditious intent' is not required for prosecution of those who deal with or possess seditious publications.

In Malaysia the 1948 Sedition Act, a relic of that era's state of emergency, deals with anyone who, does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires with any person to do any act that has or would have a seditious tendency, who utters any seditious words, or who prints, publishes or imports any seditious publication. It is a crime to possess without lawful excuse any seditious publication. A seditious tendency includes a tendency to "question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of part III of the Federal constitution".

Recent perspectives from China and Malaysia are the RSF report on Chinese censorship of chat rooms, the 2003 Information Control and Self-Censorship in the PRC and the Spread of SARS report (PDF) by the US Congressional Executive Commission on China, the 2003 Memorandum on the Malaysian Sedition Act 1948 (PDF) by Article 19 and Davidson, Friesen & Jackson's 2001 'Lawyers and the Rule of Law on Trial: Sedition Prosecutions in Malaysia 'in Criminal Law Forum 2001. A perspective on practice in Singapore is provided by Chris Lydgate's Lee's Law: How Singapore Crushes Dissent (Melbourne: Scribe 2003)

subsection heading icon     Oceania

States in the Pacific have made increasing use of sedition prosecutions to dampen criticism. In 1997 for example Taimi 'o Tonga editor Filokalafi 'Akau'ola was charged with sedition after criticising corruption in the Tongan establishment. The newspaper subsequently moved offshore. In 2003 the Tongan Supreme Court twice overturned a government ban on its import based on claims that it was seditious. Sedition prosecutions have elsewhere been used in Fiji (particularly after the Rambuka coup), the Cook Islands, Papua New Guinea and Solomons.




icon for link to next page    next page  (cases)




this site
the web

Google

version of December 2008
© Bruce Arnold
caslon.com.au | caslon analytics