by Maclean Patrick
It is clear that Umno leaders are unable to hold a public
discussion nor can they agree to disagree. It’s either their way or no way at
all. This is clear in the case of Mat Sabu, the deputy PAS president, who has
become the latest victim in a string of events that continue to show that the
biggest bully in the nation is Umno.
Not even two weeks have passed since Prime Minister Najib
Razak grandly promised to repeal the outdated Internal Security Act and three
Emergency laws to make Malaysia the “best democracy”, yet we are now witnessing
the greatest travesty to democracy itself - the silencing of the voices of
dissent.
As one member of the public told Malaysia Chronicle in an immediate reaction to
Najib's announcement:
"For real changes to be
felt by the people, it is not only the law which needs change, but the manner
in which they are used," a investment director MK had told Malaysia Chronicle.
"Until the government stops the systematic abuse and
misuse of not just the legal system but also institutions like the police and
the election commission, civil liberties remain out of reach for us
Malaysians. After all, we used to have an independent judiciary who
interpreted the law without fear or favour. Nowadays, the government can enact
all the shiny new laws they want, because it is the interpretation and
administration of those laws which can be perverted."
Only
Umno's opinion matters
Indeed, in a growing democracy, there must be room for
all to speak. Bear in mind, all citizens have the right to their opinion. But
sad to say, in Umno’s case, only its opinion matters and all others will face
the wrath of the law as they twist it to suit their political agenda.
Mat Sabu is facing the wrath of the Umno-led government and
its mighty machinery. Attorney-General Gani Patail has conveniently slapped on
Section 500 of the Penal Code and promptly got Mat Sabu arrested.
Gani's action is reflective of the federal government as a
whole. So far by its actions and track record, it is all out to stifle freedom
of speech and expression is totally contrary to Article 10 (1) of the Federal
Constitution that states : 10. (1) Subject to Clauses (2), (3) and (4)— (a) every
citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression.
By slapping Section 500 of the Penal Code on Mat Sabu, the AG
is actually saying the government is charging Mat Sabu for defaming the
government. In criminal cases of defamation, when the state prosecutes a
private person for defamation, Section 499 to Section 502 of the Penal Code is
applicable.
Criminal
defamation
But what is defamation? To put it in simple term,
defamation occurs when a person expresses words that may lower another person’s
reputation in the eyes of the public. There are two types of defamation in
Malaysia: libel and slander. Libel is when such words are expressed in a
permanent form which is usually visible to the eye, like in a book, e-mail or
picture. Slander is when such words are expressed in a temporary form, usually
when spoken or made by body movements.
Both libel and slander are civil and criminal offences. Thus,
a person who is guilty of libel or slander may be sued in court, and may even
be jailed. In civil cases, the person so defamed will normally sue the maker of
the defamatory words for compensation. The amount of the compensation depends
on the damage caused to the reputation of the person suing. In criminal cases,
the punishment for defamation is a jail sentence for a maximum of two years, or
a fine, or a combination of a jail sentence and a fine [Section 500-502 Penal
Code].
In Mat Sabu’s case, the AG chose to treat the charge as a
criminal case, thus effectively rendering Mat Sabu as a criminal.
Did Mat Sabu, in making a statement concerning a historical
event embarrass the government to the extent that he committed a crime? Or is
this a mere knee-jerk reaction from Umno, who themselves are embarrassed that
historical facts are not what they would have us believe?
Did Mat Sabu encourage people to do mischief or do acts of
violence by commenting on a historical event? Furthermore, a statement is a
statement; and reactions can run contrary to any statement. Unless, it is
proven that Mat Sabu commanded or instructed his followers to act on his
statement, mere words are but empty soundbytes.
Abusing
the law: What is the real goal?
The
AG is being overly sensitive concerning Mat Sabu’s statement and the whole
matter does not make sense when you think that it was Utusan
Malaysiathat claimed that Mat Sabu glorified the attackers as heros.
Things do not make sense from a logical or rational point of view.
This charge against Mat Sabu can only make sense when you
look at it as a means to punish a political rival.
Ever since the day Mat Sabu assumed the vice-presidency of
PAS, Umno has been out to get him. It was a calculated and intentional move to
finally get him using an apparatus of law.
Simple minded Malaysians and the Malay vote are central to
Umno’s survival. It is easy to convince them that Mat Sabu is a criminal
without having to explain why. The very image of Mat Sabu being arrested and charged
in a court sends a picture of a criminal to the Umno’s grassroots. This is the
real goal of Umno in using the Attorney-General and the police to ‘frame’ Mat
Sabu.
Hush,
Umno is listening
Remember the AG is acting on behalf of the government
and thus it must be inferred that Mat Sabu did something wrong against the
government of Malaysia. It would also mean that from now onwards, every citizen
of Malaysia must be extra careful with their words, lest we too be slapped with
Section 500 of the Penal Code.
Is this not violating Article 10 (1) of the Federal
Constitution? Are citizens not allowed to comment on historical facts? Thus,
should not guidelines be published by the AG chambers as to what constitute
statements that would embarrass the state? Isn't it only fair that the people
are educated on what they can and cannot say?
Again, we are left to wonder; if the AG was so enthusiastic
to get Mat Sabu, why was he slow to slap the likes of Ibrahim Ali, Utusan and
even the Home Minister with Section 500 of the Penal Code? Have not these
characters done more harm than Mat Sabu? And did not these characters called
for mischief among their supporters which would mean a charge under Section 505
under the same penal code?
What
about Hisham and Ibrahim Ali
In the case of the Home Minister, when he pardoned the Umno
supporters who paraded the decapitated head of a cow in protest of the
construction of a Hindu temple; did he not encourage more of his supporters to
do the same? Though he did not say it, his very actions towards his own
supporters portrayed this.
And what about Ibrahim Ali’s continuing threat against all
things non-Malay, conveniently splashed out on the front pages of Utusan
Malaysia? Are these not direct calls to do mischief?
UMNO is clearly back to its bullying ways. It is clear that
in Malaysia there are two sets of rules. The law and the police collaborate to
enforce these differing sets of rules according to the whims and fancies of
Umno. There is one set for political rivals like Mat Sabu, where every little
squeak is deemed a criminal offence and is punishable by law. But of course,
when it is to Umno’s interest, murder itself could be committed in broad
daylight.
Casino Classic
Source : MC
No comments:
Post a Comment