Hi Sacha and Serena,
Thanks for all the work you've done for the statement. I should have read
your explanation first Sacha before writing a brief note to Serena asking
again to include our suggestion. Serena, please ignore my previous message
to you. Let me then just respond to your question below:
>Having now both the letter and Unmo reaction please let Serena and I know
>if we
>shall leave the statement as is or add some additional wording , eg perhaps
>with Azimi's above quote and maybe this counter quote from Steve Gan:
>"Malaysiakini editor Steven Gan said that the online daily's policy with
>regard
>to the letters forum is to encourage free and open discussion on controversial
>issues. 'But that does not mean we publish letters without due care. We
>exercise a strict selective process in which letters that are considered
>personal attacks or those which could possibly breach existing laws are left
>out,' he said."
I think the following sentence captures the point about freedom of expression:
"Malaysiakini editor Steven Gan said that the online daily's policy with
regard to the letters forum is to encourage free and open discussion on
controversial issues."
My other comment about the statement is about the link made with
communication rights and WSIS. I think this is very good though I think
some points are not very clear and are repetitive. I've made suggested
edits in the attached document. (apologies for not keeping the original
text in this version). They're not substantive changes, just copy-editing
that tightens the statement and makes it shorter. I also think it will be
effective if we use language from the Tokyo Declaration and its support for
freedom of expression and I've put one in.
I do hope you will consider these suggestions.
best,
Chat
407_2.doc