In the name of security

Editorial

The Weekend Express - Saturday, May 6, Sunday, May 7, 2000

"Our country sinks beneath the yoke; It weeps, it bleeds, and each new day a gash
Is added to her wounds."

- Shakespeare (Macbeth)

The Public Security Ordinance was brought into force from midnight Wednesday to proscribe all activities designed to encourage terrorism and disrupt the normal activities of the people. This is a very wide-ranging law which has been invoked at times of crisis in the post-independence history of this country.

By its very nature, this law tries to embrace all normal activities in the country. It has provision to proscribe any organisation, ban any publication, confiscate, any property, requisition any vehicles, ban public meetings, impose curfews, dispose of all dead bodies and in effect, dispense summary justice for offences committed in a country which is on a war-footing.

This particular law can just about do anything, and once the proper procedure is followed, it cannot be called into question in any Court of Law.

Though it may sound draconian, this has a precedent in British law as well - provided the situation in the country warrants the imposition of the Public Security Ordinance. Usually this is done with the consent of Parliament.

In any law, the execution of its clauses depends on human beings - and this is where we urge the Government and the competent authority or authorities to be appointed under this law to act with tolerance, humanity and justice. The public security law is not meant to pay-off old grudges but by the very definition of Public Security, it must involve some danger to the State and to the people.

The law must be enforced for the protection of the people and not used as a cover-up to keep the people in the dark about the activities of the Government, its representatives or even its enemies. If the Government balances the imposition of the law with transparency in its actions by taking the people into its confidence, then naturally the Government should receive the endorsement and the support of the people as well as of the Opposition parties.

Given the heightened tension today because of the demoralising news from the North, it is good that the Government is prepared for any eventuality - such as extremist communal groups trying to fan the flames of racial or religious violence and disharmony. Given the horrendous incidents of Emergency '58 and Black July '83 it is better to be prepared now than try to impose law and order after all hell has broken loose.

Once again we strongly recommend the strength of this law be tempered with justice in its usage. Its blanket imposition of censorship should be lifted so that responsible journalists can give the government the support it needs at this hour. Surely our journalists are not a wolf-pack baying at the heels of a government in crisis. What is needed now is unity to heal the wounds inflicted on the body-politic.