IS free speech a defence against unsavoury or racist remarks on ethnic and religious groups?

Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad defended his anti-Semitic comments at Columbia University in New York recently.

Knowing very well that Dr Mahathir may make such statements, he was still allowed the freedom to speak. As the prime minister of Malaysia and a vocal leader, Columbia University gave him that opportunity.

When he was questioned by a member of audience, he defended his remarks by citing the right to free speech.

Perhaps, Columbia University made an exception in the case of Dr Mahathir.

Its president, Lee Bollinger, in a reply to those who were opposed to Dr Mahathir giving a speech, said students must be prepared to face difficult situations, and not shy away from them.

Perhaps, democratic and vibrant countries are in a position to tolerate speeches that are xenophobic in nature.

Is Malaysia or Dr Mahathir in a position to take such a stand as Bollinger’s? Will the government allow hateful or racist speeches, in the name of freedom of speech?

The consequences of permitting such comments in the name of free speech are well known, especially in a multiracial and multireligious country like Malaysia.

If we invoke freedom of speech here to engage in hate and extremism, the consequences are unimaginable.

Perhaps, Dr Mahathir is fully aware of the mechanical invocation of freedom of speech that could have dire implications not just in Malaysia, but in other countries as well.

There is no absolute freedom of speech anywhere, even in mature democracies. Freedom of speech cannot be used to deny freedom to others.

Just imagine what would happen if fugitive preacher Zakir Naik is given absolute freedom of speech in this country. He would probably run “amok”. – September 30, 2019.

* Ramasamy Palanisamy reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.