Page 49 - Conflict, Terrorism, and the Media In Asia

38 Benjamin Cole
documented alleged cases of torture and mistreatment in detention centres, as
have other independent media sources. This de-legitmizes the use of the ISA in
the eyes of the public and risks generating support for those in custody. These
reports however, largely focus on individuals who are not readily identifiable as
members of the KMM or JI, and many detainees specifically deny membership
of militant groups.
One article published on the Aliran website suggested that

There is another reason why they don’t deny the routine abuses of power
under ISA. They want the maltreatment of detainees to deter other people
from standing up for their rights as citizens and from being counted among
those who openly criticise wrong doings in public and high places.
Consequently, the threat of ISA underlies the pervasive culture of fear we all
live with. That’s how ISA creates Barisan National’s ‘silenced majority’! The
culture of fear is never more obvious than when the ruling politicians feel
threatened.
(Ramakrishnan 2001)

These debates tie in to wider public concern about the judiciary, which is widely
considered not to be independent. The most high profile example of government
control of the judiciary was the gaoling of the former Deputy Prime Minister
Anwar Ibrahim in 1998 in what was widely considered to have been a politically
motivated trial. Judicial inability to redress perceived abuses is another key aspect
in eroding the legitimacy of the existing system of government.
Unsurprisingly, the government uses the media to rebut these allegations. It
argues that terrorism is a threat and therefore harsh measures are required to deal
with it. Mahatir used Bernama to argue that ‘those in detention are people not
known before as important figures in the opposition party.’. . . ‘They do have links
to the opposition party. Opposition parties are governed by the law and there is no
special privilege for them. We apply the same law on members of government
parties also’ (Bernama 2002b). The justifications for using the ISA are supported
by occasional reporting of the release of ISA detainees (Bernama 2003c), which
reinforces the claim that the ISA is only used to detain genuine militants.
In addition, signs of renewed judicial activism in the twenty-first century,
including demands for a review of the ISA, has also helped to mitigate the poten-
tially damaging impact of using the ISA. That the institutions of the state are seen
to challenge the perceived abuses of the government is an important element in
maintaining popular support for the existing political system. This was undoubtedly
aided by the release of Anwar in 2004.
The media debate on the ISA communicates mixed messages to militant groups
and their supporters. On the one hand it illustrates that the government will not be
intimidated and that it is prepared to suppress militancy, but, on the other hand, it
shows that there is some popular opposition to government counter-terror policies
that militant groups could try to exploit. Yet despite this, the public generally
supports the way the government has dealt with the perceived terror threat.