AUG 17 The controversies over the section 114A of the Evidence Act are not hard to comprehend. The key lies with the correlation between the freedom accorded and accountability. <\/p>\n
To enjoy freedom of expression, one is ethically bound to shoulder the responsibility of exercising such a freedom. <\/p>\n
This is a basic social norm and the core spirit of a community ruled by law. Any orderly democratic society cannot do away with this prerequisite. <\/p>\n
That said, there is often a grey zone standing in the way of freedom and responsibility. It is at times next to impossible to draw a distinct line between the two opposing attributes. <\/p>\n
Several days ago, a friend forwarded me a joke that somewhat epitomises such a conflict. <\/p>\n
A Beijing reporter asks a visiting leader: What do you think of the hostesses here? <\/p>\n
Appearing shocked, the leader asks: You mean you have hostesses in Beijing as well? <\/p>\n
The newspaper headline the following morning: Visiting Leader asks for Beijing hostesses. <\/p>\n
The leader rings up to clarify: Please, Im not interested in hostesses! <\/p>\n
Another days headline: Uninterested in local hostesses, the Leader has higher tastes for after-dark pleasure. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Link:<\/p>\n
Freedom comes with responsibility \u2014 Tay Tian Yan<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" AUG 17 The controversies over the section 114A of the Evidence Act are not hard to comprehend. The key lies with the correlation between the freedom accorded and accountability. To enjoy freedom of expression, one is ethically bound to shoulder the responsibility of exercising such a freedom Continue reading