THE CICAK.com

Danish daily, own up and say sorry

By SAMIR HARITH

Express yourself. Publish your thoughts, illustrate your feelings, speak your views. But for the love of all that is holy, do it with tact.

A Danish daily, Jyllands-Posten, was lambasted recently for publishing caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. They drew the ire of the international Muslim community which resulted in Muslim communities around the globe boycotting Danish products and burning the Danish flag.

The editors of the paper that published the caricatures upheld that it was their inherent right to publish, for not being able to do so would violate their right to freedom of expression. They refused to apologise and they refused to withhold further publication. They believed they had the moral right to do so and that they would not bow down to any pressure whatsoever. They were martyrs in their own eyes.

Who would have thought that something as harmless as a drawing would spark such an international outrage?

Obviously not the editors of Jyllands-Posten. The caricatures published not only went against the beliefs of the Muslim communities but even went so far as to satirise the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist. No doubt this caused much anguish to Muslims internationally.

Was it worth it?

Was it worth sacrificing the integrity of the daily? Was it worth having Denmark take the flak on its behalf? Was it worth angering a community which has already seen much injustice done to its beliefs and to its people?

Which brings us to the question of freedom of expression.

Freedom of expression is enshrined as a human right, being able to express one’s views and not to face persecution for it. Many have cited this right whenever it suits them. Japan cited it in relation to its refusal to acknowledge its war-mongering past. Salman Rushdie cited it when “The Satanic Verses” received controversial attention. Heck, even Mahathir cited it when we was invited as a speaker for SUHAKAM’s human rights day conference.

No doubt, it is probably the most abused right enshrined by man. There also seems to be a great deal of ignorance amongst the general public as to how and when freedom of expression is applicable.

Freedom of expression is a right which must be exercised with care. A right which must be used only when the truth is in concern. It should not be abused to publish falsehoods, slander or crude humour.

Unfortunately these are all very vague terms. Terms which are open and subject to interpretation.

Let us take a step back, away from the issue of freedom of expression and look at human rights as a whole. Why does it seem that this particular right receives much more attention than the other rights enshrined in the convention? What about the human right to shelter, their rights to nationalities, their rights to practice their faith?

Why has this, pardon my bluntness, this somewhat insignificant right overshadowed all the other rights which our forefathers worked so hard to enshrine?

Freedom of expression was intended to highlight injustices caused by the violation of the other rights around the world. It was created to support and protect the other human rights. It served as the human right’s shield against a world with those who would try to silence the cry of justice.

However, most people have interpreted it as being able to express whatever inane views they have, regardless of its ramifications under the impression that people would have to respect what they say in the name of human rights.

Have you heard of the CRC, The Convention on the Rights of the Child? Not many people have. It does not receive quite as much attention as the topic of human rights does, mainly because it is less controversial. It was drafted because it was realised that children require different needs from adults.

The CRC is made up of four main principles: Survival, protection, development and participation. It ensures that children’s rights to these principles are not violated.

In a lot of CRC awareness workshops, which have been conducted across the country, many parents and teachers are afraid that their children might become arrogant, bullish beings who throw their weight around because now “they have rights.� Which is why in all the awareness workshops, it was made clear to the children that with rights come responsibilities.

Responsibilities? How, you say?

A popular exercise they use in CRC workshops: Ali’s mum confronts him about the lousy report card she found in his room. Ali shoots back, saying that mum had no right to be in his room in the first place. She violated his right to privacy. The question is, how do you resolve this conflict?

Participants are then required to use their knowledge of their rights to come to a compromise between Ali and his mum. Most of the participants, mostly 14 year olds, come up with a solution where Ali apologises for not being honest and mum apologises for going through his stuff. In the end, both parties are happy, although it would have been better had Ali been honest in the first place.

Obviously it seems that 14 year olds have a clearer concept of their rights after a few days in an awareness workshop than most adults have in their entire lifetime.

If we were to apply that example to the caricature issue, we would see the Jyllands-Posten apologizing for publishing those drawings and the relevant Muslim communities apologizing for their violent and extreme reactions.

And much like Ali, it would have been better if the caricatures were not published in the first place.

But as usual, egos come into play and neither are responsible enough to own up to their faults and respect the rights of others. If Ali and his mum can resolve it amicably, why can’t these two parties do the same?

It’s a very twisted, wicked world we live in nowadays where personal pride is of a greater concern than human rights. The defender of rights, the freedom of expression has been abused in such a way that the very mention of it stirs controversy.

It may be too late to repair the damage which has already been done, but it is possible for us to sort out the mess and in the future, act responsibly.

The caricatures were obviously intended to milk a few cheap laughs. Perhaps we may be able to do the same when we look back on this issue in the future, and laugh about it.

—
SAMIR HARITH is a contributing writer for theCICAK.

Samir is a right-, upper-, centre-, and diagonal left-winger with an affinity for tea, but also enjoys drinking free coffee.