Finally, the wheels of the long-proposed Malaysian Media Council have started to turn again.
After almost 50 years of deliberating the merits of establishing this council, it looks like there's going to be light at the end of the tunnel.
Malaysian Press Institute chief executive officer Datuk Chamil Wariya said the council was mooted at a meeting between senior editors and former prime minister Tun Abdul Razak Hussein on June 18, 1974.
That's how long the idea has been bandied about.
After years of impasse, the idea was revived when Gobind Singh Deo became communications and multimedia minister in 2018.
A new pro-tem committee was formed to work on the details and the then cabinet approved the establishment of the council on Dec 6, 2019.
But the work of the 21 committee members under the stewardship of Malaysiakini's Premesh Chandran stopped dead in its tracks when the Sheraton Move happened in February 2020.
Fortunately, the unity government has seen fit to bring back the noble idea to life.
Communications and Digital Minister Fahmi Fadzil and his deputy, Teo Nie Ching, have been proactive in their approach to the establishment of the council, reflecting the principle that acting in good faith is at the heart of decent work.
Teo recently chaired a meeting with pro-tem committee members to iron out issues, especially with regard to the drafting of a bill, which needed input from legal brains from her ministry and the Attorney-General's Chambers.
The key point is for the draft bill to be more specific before it's taken to Parliament.
Fahmi described it best when he said that the council's role must be clear to ensure that there is no conflict with the legal scope of its establishment and supervision by the government.
Tokoh Wartawan Negara Tan Sri Johan Jaaffar says it's important to avoid the government dominating the council as it would hinder the media's freedom.
Thus, having media practitioners running the council would ensure that the rights of the media are voiced collectively. This would pave the way for a two-way exchange of views between the government and the media.
The composition of the pro-tem committee has also been enlarged to include practising senior journalists besides veteran journalists, academics and civil society advocates, because at the end of the day, the council will represent publishers, media practitioners and the public.
The pro-tem committee feels that with the growth of the new media, and the change in media consumption driven by technological developments, a media council is best suited to set common standards and practices to fulfil the responsibility of informing the public promptly and accurately.
And having the council to demand a code to promote ethical and responsible conduct will boost media literacy.
It will also guide journalism to the wider principles of justice and human rights.
As for funding, the consensus is that the government should provide seed funding. It should not be at the expense of media freedom, although the council has to account to the government how it spends the money.
Subsequently, the council can be self-funding as the pro-tem committee has suggested that a cess be imposed on telcos given that a substantial portion of the consumption of news is via handphones.
It has been envisioned that the council will promote responsible publishing that encompasses fair, balanced and accurate reporting, as well as highlight injustice and inequality, and be a forum for public debate.
This is against the backdrop that the media itself needs to be accountable for its conduct and ensure that the public has a right to question and hold it accountable.
So this time around, the media council is for real; as some say coming together is a beginning, keeping together is progress, and working together is success.
The writer is a former Bernama chief executive officer and editor-in-chief