The challenge of geography has been defined in whole new ways within the new space of control called cyber space.

The root word for cybernetics means a oarsman steering through rough waters. So, control and losing control define this \”cyberworld.\”

Therefore, popular blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin could conclude his eight hour interview with the Dang Wangi police redefining the new space of control by stating that his blog does not sit in Malaysian space and that they (the police) and Malaysian laws alone did not have control and authority over his blog or its postings.

What this means is that unless he or his community violate some clearly defined international crime, they are quite free to roam and communicate in cyber space without any fear or favour.

The webspace has now become the new frontier of control and therefore evolves into a new kind of space for sovereignty related issues.

Malaysian authorities who are used to physical control and the use of their national authority and local laws to define traditional space will find the new cyber space more difficult to steer through.

Authority is less comfortable with undefined space. In fact, if they are serious about \”cyber-control\” or \”cyber-censorship,\” they would have to do it jointly with Interpol and foreign web agencies.

But the problem that will remain is what really is the crime action or intent? And, more importantly where is the hard evidence?

\"\"

The advent of global citizens

Raja Petra says he did not do a specific posting on July 11th! And more importantly, where was it committed? How was it committed? Do the police have the wherewithal to \”go and recover the servers,\” as they did with malaysiakini when Umno reported in 2001?

And really, was it in fact committed in Malaysian airspace or cyberspace? How do you prove that? Is there even such a thing? If not, how can these offences be deemed a Malaysian crime?

To me these questions remain. Sedition is publishing or uttering some criminal intent and there must be proof of it.

When we were at the National IT Council Secretariat, in the days when ICT was the in- thing, one of the core issues we warned the government was that the Internet age will redefine the nature of sovereignty and its full implications of what it means to continue to be a nation-state.

Under one strategic programme called e-sovereignty we highlighted three core issues of identity, security and national unity as key problem areas.

In the globalized cyber age, most Malaysians who are electronically connected; and live, breathe, and have their being in the cyber world, will be entirely global in their thinking and therefore will not be limited to the traditional loyalties of only national identity.

Most would be global citizens first subscribing to a set of universal values and rather than blindly adhering to traditional values and ideals of nationality or worse still simply ethnicity.

In fact, Kenichi Ohmae, the Japanese consultant who proposed the MSC idea even predicted the so-called death of the nation-state.

Although, to my mind, that is going a bit too far, that is at least the direction of loyalties in the cyber age.

National loyalties do not mean much to the global citizen.

In fact, Professor Ian Angel of the LSE has talked about this in his book The New Barbarians.

Information, misinformation or disinformation

What then is the supposed crime of Raja Petra? Was it information, misinformation or disinformation? Again, the question in cyber space is, who defines what this is?

Are national authorities the only agencies who define truth of a matter?

Here again, I would like to relate a true happening after the so-called first cyber-crime incident in Malaysia.

Two students were charged with spreading rumours about racial clashes in Kampung Baru and Jalan Chow Kit.

The rumours spread like wild fire in cyber space. By midnight, people were rushing to supermarkets to stock up and prepare for a curfew. To track the rumour-mongers, the police armed with a legal instrument required Jaring, the ICT service provider to track the offenders.

\"\"

They could only track the message trail to the IP address of the computer. Then the police had to charge the two students who had access to the computer, but the case was thrown out because it could not be proven that they actually sat behind the computer and sent those rumour mails.

Proof of use of the computer alone is not good enough as both the act of publishing and the act of intentionality of criminal intent has to be proven.

For, that is the actual crime: sitting behind the computer and spreading malicious intentioned rumors.

But, as it is said in the ICT industry, you never know if it is a monkey sending the mail, for it is possible for such a random event to happen; although unlikely.

It is at this point that the requirement for real evidence where necessary, apart from proving intentionality, is of paramount importance for the case and charges to hold in a court of law.

One has to prove not just the evidence of such mail is present but also that certain finger-prints actually sent them!

Crook and the hero

My only good wishes to the police is; apart from resorting to create fear and frighten Raja Petra, friends and family, by acceding to the Umno view of life and world, you may be wrongly dealing with the whole issue.

In fact, my colleagues and I at Mimos then, did give a full and extended lecture on this very subject to all at the police headquarters.

So, I am sorry that we have failed to communicate the essence of the message and you are therefore unable to distinguish between truth, untruth and distorted truth!

I hope wisdom will prevail, and unlike the former Minister of Information who blamed the Singaporeans for starting the rumour (an untruth) and the then IGP who really told the truth; and Jaring CEO who did what is right before the law; and the police will find no basis for charging Raja Petra with any real crime.

Otherwise, I can only warn that he will become the martyr and a common man\’s public hero.

For the citizens in the cities are not blind; and they do know how to distinguish between truth and non-truth; as they do also to distinguish between the crook and the hero.

In the 50th year of our independence, even my little ones, have now learnt and know about Raja Petra, thanks to the crook\’s report about Raja Petra.

Maybe it is time for the government and the people to evaluate all those who sit in parliament; to see who are the ones who serve with integrity and who are those who are simply empty vessels that make a lot of hot air but are not able to serve the people.

On July 14, an insignificant team of integrity enthusiasts have started a pet-project called a Citizen\’s Think Tank.

The goal is to report and evaluate our elected and appointed (especially local councillors) representatives so that ordinary citizens can vote wisely.

I pray that their effort will slowly become a framework to uphold and promote integrity in this country so that we can begin to distinguish Emperors without clothes and can all it just that. Naked Emperors!