The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is setting a bad and dangerous precedent in publicly pressurizing the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Gani Patail to charge DAP National Chairman and MP for Bukit Gelugor, Karpal Singh for sedition and turn a legal issue into a political and racial one.
This is the first time in 50 years that a Prime Minister had so flagrantly and blatantly put public pressure on the Attorney-General to prosecute an Opposition leader, making a total mockery of the absolute discretion of the Attorney-General as entrenched in Article 145(3) of the Constitution “to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah Court, a native court or a court-martial”.
On Thursday, Abdullah said he had instructed Umno secretary-general Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor to lodge a police report against Karpal for making allegedly seditious remarks about the Sultan of Perak when Karpal had reiterated publicly that he had not questioned Sultan Azlan Shah’s prerogatives as the state’s head of religion of Islam.
Yesterday, the Prime Minister has upped the ante by publicly demanding that the Attorney-General speed up the probe against Karpal.
Abdullah has never shown interest or concern as Prime Minister about high-profile cases, whether police reports previously made against Cabinet Ministers or recently against Umno for the series of seditious conduct against the Malay Rulers after the March 8 general election over the appointment of the Terengganu Mentri Besar.
Abdullah should have used his high office to end the controversy which arose from the distortion of Karpal’s raising of a legal principle established by the case of Federal Territory Education Director and others vs Loot Ting Yee about the transfer of federal and state civil servants into a challenge of the prerogative of Sultan Azlan Shah over matters pertaining to Islam and Malay custom.
The country is trying to come out of the “judicial darkness” which it had been plunged into for two decades as a result of the series of crises of confidence and credibility in the independence, impartiality and integrity of the system of justice – not just about the judiciary but also other important players especially the Attorney-General.
The Prime Minister’s public and persistent demand for action to be taken against Karpal by the Attorney-General does not create confidence that the present administration is fully committed to end the two-decade-long “judicial darkness” in the country by allowing all the major stakeholders in the system of justice their full and unfettered independence and impartiality – whether judges or the Attorney-General.
#1 by year of snake on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:09 am
As usual one of our national newspaper headline Many Malaysians are upset with Kapal but they dare not publish the other headline Many More Malaysians agree with Kapal!
#2 by TC33 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:20 am
The real winners of PRU 12 turn out to be the Malay rulers.
They call the shot now.
YB LKS did not realize this subtle change and forced to offer a speedy apology to the Perak sultan.
YB Kapal Singh did not learn from LKS, naively and voluntarily gave his comments from a legal stand point against the same sultan, did not apologize and fell into UMNO’s evil trap.
He is a brave oppositionist and a competent lawyer, but definately not a good strategist, nor a team player.
#3 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:27 am
LKS was a different situation from that of Karpal. Not being able to see the difference shows lack of maturity in thought.
#4 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:28 am
We eagerly await Karpal getting hold copies of those police reports lodged and hopefully matters can proceed further.
#5 by Cinapek on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:38 am
Hey YB Kit, do not get distracted by this diversionary tactic. AAB is milking this to the max so that all attention will be focussed on this matter and the pressure will be off him to resign.
He knows that he can exploit the feelings on the ground so much so that even the UMNO members that has been screaming for his head will stand behind him if he can persuade them that the institution of the Malay monarchy is threatened.
Make no mistake about it. They will close ranks the moment they perceived that their race is threatened, whether real or imagined and AAB is playing this up. Karpal was silly to play into their hands.
#6 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:47 am
AAB is milking this to the max so that all attention will be focussed on this matter and the pressure will be off him to resign. – Cinapek
Very true. But instead since he started the nonsense, all of a sudden the pressure on Badawi to go drink some fresh orange has suddenly mounted:
I would consider myself a betrayer of my country if I allow this to happen. And those sycophants who fawn before Abdullah will also be betrayers of their country, their people and for Malays, their religion even.
http://sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=22185
Asked what his priorities would be if he got the nominations to contest the Umno presidency and won it and become the Prime Minister, he said unity would be foremost on his mind. “To bring about unity in all aspects of government policies, programmes and even to the NGOs and the political institutions. That should also be the primary concern of everybody,” he said.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/5/11/nation/21219858&sec=nation
Q: Meaning you are against the 30% quota for anyone to contest the presidency?
A: Yes, I have expressed that because it is undemocratic. Some smart aleck came up with the idea that we should impose a certain quota system that you can only contest if you get a certain number of nominations.
Why do you need a certain quota imposed on them?
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/5/11/nation/21220305&sec=nation
#7 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:53 am
Karpal Singh also said he would take the next course of action against the Prime Minister if he failed to why he made such a remarks on the matter.
“Abdullah Ahmad is diverting the attention from his own mounting problems within Umno and pressure to step down.”
He said he would raise the matter in Parliament on Monday.
http://bloggingr4life.blogspot.com/2008/05/karpal-singh-in-fear-of-safety.html
#8 by gundam on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 11:53 am
karpal mst find a proper way to put tis thing to an end immediately else both the DAP and PR will suffer. sorry is not the hardest word to say now…for the sake of future.
#9 by subject on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 12:22 pm
stupid chansellor should be replaced with talented leader from opposition in the earliest convenient. Otherwise, will be fleer by the world.
#10 by anak sungeisiput on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 12:26 pm
If a Malay were to say something adverse to the conduct of Sultans it is not sedition, but if a non-malay were to question the leaglity of any actions by the Sultan, it is sedition.
I think racsim is the underpinning idealogy parctised by the UMNOputras. They have no brain cells to govern by any other idealogy. It is time the the non-Malays insisted upon their eqaul rights and be treated a citizens of the country- as Malaysians.
Badawi your reputation in the International scene is a stinker.
#11 by Jong on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 12:30 pm
It’s a non-issue blown up by Umno.
If this “Prime Minister of All Malaysians” persists on an all-out effort to attack Pakatan Rakyat, he is making a terrible mistake. This is not the way for him to divert attention off his back to calls for him to step down; it may infact be the last nail to his coffin.
He must be reminded whatever he does, they are still coming for him sooner than he thought. So whilst he still has the time, he should live up to what he call himself: “PM of All Malaysians” and show us he deserves it.
#12 by pjboy on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 12:41 pm
Dear YAB LKS
Pls ask PM to explain why not speed up the case on what RPK wrote about & charged for sedition for (wrongfully). Also on the Lingamgate. These cases are being dragged but PM put pressure on Karpal’s case. It’s obvious PM is on a personal vendetta against Karpal – for reasons we all know – Karpal is one of the lawyers in the Mongolian case & no doubt in the background for the Lingam video case. No doubt to the public, these 2 cases are very badly handled & who is to be blamed? If I were the AG, I would resign before being the scapegoat.
#13 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 12:43 pm
Badawi has lost control:
The current leadership is working at cross-purposes and are not united behind the party president. In fact, some leaders have become too powerful, assuming powers that they don’t even have under the party constitution and running roughshod over the grassroots.
http://themalaysianinsider.com/mni/umno-has-to-reform-to-be-relevant.html
#14 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 12:55 pm
If I were the AG, I would resign before being the scapegoat. – pjboy
That`s an interesting observation. But let`s say, if the AG were `working` for an opposing camp, took up the case, and lost it.
For the AG it would be a QED (quite easily done).
Then that would leave Badawi floundering laughing stock, and deeply humiliated as well.
#15 by gundam on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 2:46 pm
for someone to be truly respected and revered, he/she needs to demonstrate the ultimate capability on a level playing field thus win it to convince everyone, not by declaring supremacy or asking for special rights. throughout human history, promoting inequality will always see the oppressed fight back and everyone loses in the end. wat’s the point of starting a game in the first place then? our enemy should not be within, cherish our fellow countrymen for we work in a team for everyone’s interest in this age of globalisation. i love tis place for its’ true color…regardless of religion..coz
I see your true colors
Shining through
I see your true colors
And that’s why I love you
So don’t be afraid to let them show
Your true colors
True colors are beautiful,
Like a rainbow
#16 by lopez on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 5:01 pm
They are several key position that are be ing influenced these days by interested parties, it appears that sheriffs have found a pat person already so r fellas in the green.
But those in the black are in the at their cross road now, it up to their conscience , if they have any left, since these bunch does not just happen to be there either.
#17 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 5:24 pm
I am not an expert in Constitution Law, but what The Prime Minister is applying to Yb Karpal Singh should also be applied to the Prime Minister.
With Deepest Respect to their Royal Highnesses , as it is inscribed in the Rukun Negara, that we are subjects and to remain loyal to the Sultan. This i will do and continue to do .
As the Thais do revered The King as demi God.
Someone wrote about it is ok, for malays to say something adverse about the Sultan and not non malays. well. This is political , and racist to the core.
Now, all Malays are Muslims, and Muslims are to sembah to none other than Allah SWT. Did not God created all as equal. But the YAB Prime Minister, with his years of religious study would surely understand that . I think so. I hope so.
In Malaysia, and also many developing ,countries and even Japan, once reverved their Emperor as Divine. This goes against the very element of Islamic teachings. I Hate mixing politics with religion, but since the Premier is perceived as very knowlegeable man and religious man, i like to pose this fundamental question to him than.
Since when have you taken to role of playing God. There is NO COMPARISON , to ALLAH SWT, and by so doing is SYRIK. right?
MY respect and honour to The KING and the SULTANS will remain.
I will remain loyal to the KING and The SULTANS, but my first duty as hamba Allah SWT is to none again than my chosen GOD.
I will liked to be charged for sedition too, and to be charged in the Syariah Court, and be stoned to death. Please take up my offer, YAB Perdana Menteri Malaysia.
#18 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 5:28 pm
YB Karpal Singh,
In the case of YM Raja Petra , the prosecution have 14 witnesess. Dear YB, i can be your witness if you are ever charged.
yours sincerely.
#19 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 7:01 pm
“Someone wrote about it is ok, for malays to say something adverse about the Sultan and not non malays. well. This is political , and racist to the core.” ADAM YONG
I won’t quite put it that way.
Don’t you agree that Sec 3 (c ) and (f) of the Sedition Act do not by definition target the Malays. These provisions are drafted into the Act to prevent non-Malays from questioning the position of Malay Rulers and Malay rights. It is seditious just to raise issues relating to them. Of course, it is all about politics and race.
Would a Malay raising issues involving Article 153 (on which the NEP was grounded), Article 152( national language) and Article 181(Malay Rulers) fall foul of the Sedition Act? Technically speaking, yes. But can you imagine a Malay raising issues pertaining, for example, to the status of the Sultans and the Agong.
#20 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 7:10 pm
“I recall the statement made by the First Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Tuanku Abdul Rahman, when requested by a foreign emissary to sack me from the office of the Prime Minister of Malaya,” said the First Prime Minister and Bapa Merdeka, Tunku Abdul Rahman, on 23 January 1978.
“’Oh, I cannot, for he is appointed by the people and not by me,” replied His Majesty, “On the other hand, he can sack me.’”
“If this system were to change and the Rulers were given the sovereign right and prerogative to rule by the DIVINE RIGHT of kings,” added the Tunku, “then I fear it would be only a question of time before the whole institution was scrapped.”
During the Constitutional Crisis about a decade later, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Ghaffar Baba, said that it is not unlawful to criticise the Rulers. That does not tantamount to sedition. You may not, however, propose that the Monarchy be abolished and for Malaysia to be turned into a Republic, as that would constitute a crime under the Sedition Act.
http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/7250/1/
#21 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 7:24 pm
“Now, all Malays are Muslims, and Muslims are to sembah to none other than Allah SWT. Did not God created all as equal.”
Surat Al-Hujurat, (verse 13)?
“There is no God but God” are both found in the Koran and the Christian Bible. Remember ‘Allah’ is God in the Arabic language.
So you’d argue that everytime a Muslim gathers his hands, raises them clasped together in the position of the ‘sembah’ when seeking audience with the Sultan or the Agong or members of the Royalty, he or she is committing a sin?
#22 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 7:37 pm
KUALA LUMPUR, May 11 — When the Abdullah administration makes public the explosive Royal Commission report on the V.K. Lingam video, one man’s every move will come under scrutiny.
Not Lingam or former Lord President Tun Ahmad Fairuz who have been identified by the commission as the parties involved in the controversial telephone conversation where judicial appointments were being brokered.
Not Tengku Adnan Mansor or Tan Sri Vincent Tan who allegedly discussed appointments of judges with the then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
The man in the spotlight will be beleaguered Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail. The fact that the commission has verified the authenticity of the tape and saw it necessary to recommend a raft of charges and possibilities against the main actors will be an embarrassment for the government’s chief legal officer.
When the scandal first broke late last year, he declared that “no criminal offence appears to have been committed” and said that Lingam “was in a monologue over his mobile phone and it was unclear who he was talking to”. He was criticised by the Opposition for shooting from the hip without recommending a thorough probe into the episode.
http://themalaysianinsider.com/mni/lingam-video-report-has-ag-under-duress.html
#23 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 7:55 pm
I listened to much of what the lawyer Haris has had to say when giving his talk on the origin of ‘sedition’ in England and how the doctrine developed over hundreds of years, and what it meant to society there today. His attempt to give a historical perspective to our own law on sedition today is nothing more than a history lesson. Do we need a history lesson?
Seditious libel may be a misdemeanor today under English law; or may be “severely circumscribed” in the U.S. by the First Amendment of their Constitution.
But the fact remains that sedition is a serious crime today in Malaysia and that the Sedition Act 1948, in my opinion, is allowed to remain on our books after independence for one purpose and one purpose only i.e. to take issues which brought UMNO into power out of the public forum.
#24 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:00 pm
Meanwhile, we look forward to the learned AG to take Karpal out of circulation.
#25 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:10 pm
dear udergrad2.
I am a muslim. but i am not a malay.
where lies my locus standi ?
His Royal Highness The King and The Sultan are the guardian of Islam for the Nation and their respective states.
Btw, muslims do not clasp their palms ( or hands ) together when we pray.
IN the Rukun Negara , the Belief in GOD comes first.
#26 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:14 pm
Btw, muslims do not clasp their palms ( or hands ) together when we pray. – ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH
The author got mixed up with Thailand mebbe.
#27 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:21 pm
“Btw, muslims do not clasp their palms ( or hands ) together when we pray.” ADAM YONG
Sorry, I assumed so.
But the clasping of the hands gathering them into the position of the ‘sembah’ when you meet the Sultan or when seeking the audience of the Agong to speak, if you are a Malay and a Muslim, would be what some call ‘menduakan Tuhan’ – a sin in the eyes of God.
#28 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:22 pm
I think it has its origin in Hindu custom if not Thai.
#29 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:27 pm
“Meanwhile, we look forward to the learned AG to take Karpal out of circulation.”
I believe Karpal’s chances of spending two years at His Majesty’s pleasure and hospitality are about as equal to those of RPK.
#30 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:29 pm
Dear HJ Angus.
I think you got a narrow view of DYMM Sultan Azlan Shah. He does listen to his advisors , and he does like any human being subject to errors and mistakes.
However, neither DYMM Sultan of Perak or The Raja Muda of Perak or the Regent of Kelantan, made any ‘fuss’ over YB Karpal Singh remarks. If you read carefully, DYTM Raja Nazrin , was merely wanted to be consulted over the sacking of Datuk Jamry. The wisdom there was, in as much as UMNO has its brand of Islam Hadhari, so too has Pas, which if left unchecked , can be calling everyone a kafir. It was more of a neccessity than a compulsory issue. I do agreed with HRH RAJA NAZRIN.
AS for DYTM the Regent of Kelantan, speech made, and further explaination was given by the pa, the the full text of his speech was not published. The Regent of kelantan further reassured that He is for all Malaysians.
#31 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:29 pm
I think it has its origin in Hindu custom if not Thai. – yawn, history lesson
#32 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:33 pm
“I am a muslim. but i am not a malay.” ADAM
So you do not fall under Article 160(2).
#33 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:34 pm
DEAR undergrad2.
i am a muslim. i am not a malay.
what is my locus standi ?
#34 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:36 pm
Dear undergrad2.
i dont know law la.
what is 160 (2)
can talk or cannot talk ?
#35 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:38 pm
“However, neither DYMM Sultan of Perak or The Raja Muda of Perak or the Regent of Kelantan, made any ‘fuss’ over YB Karpal Singh remarks.” ADAM
I believe the statement by the Sultan of Perak saved Karpal’s skin.
#36 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:38 pm
dear tickler,
are the pilot that i know?
#37 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:42 pm
ADAM,
I suppose it depends on how you raise the issues relating to Art. 160(2) Federal Constitution 1957. Art. 160 (2) itself is not among the Articles referred to by the Sedition Act.
#38 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:45 pm
Oh I certainly am not a pilot, but they do fly me around when necessary.
He might be one :)
#39 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:49 pm
What locus standi are you talking about, Adam Yong?
#40 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:54 pm
Pas has always wanted to introduced the Hudud law, which is rejected.
so does most Malaysians , including malays who are muslims and indian muslims and other muslims.
Please see the wisdom of DYMM Sultan Azlan Shah.
#41 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 8:57 pm
thanks tickler.
great of you.
#42 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:00 pm
Can a muslim say something adverse about The Sultan ?
since according to you Malays can. non Malay cannot.
#43 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:02 pm
I did not say that.
#44 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:03 pm
This is what I wrote earlier –
Don’t you agree that Sec 3 (c ) and (f) of the Sedition Act do not by definition target the Malays. These provisions are drafted into the Act to prevent non-Malays from questioning the position of Malay Rulers and Malay rights. It is seditious just to raise issues relating to them. Of course, it is all about politics and race.
Would a Malay raising issues involving Article 153 (on which the NEP was grounded), Article 152( national language) and Article 181(Malay Rulers) fall foul of the Sedition Act? Technically speaking, yes. But can you imagine a Malay raising issues pertaining, for example, to the status of the Sultans and the Agong.
#45 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:05 pm
Gotta go to Church. Talk to you later.
#46 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:10 pm
if sec 3 (c) and (f) do not by defination target the malays.
can it not be interpretated as targeting non malays ?
#47 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:11 pm
chow. God Bless you and family. goodnite from Malaysia.
#48 by Joshua Tan Kok Hauw on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 9:30 pm
BN is applying double standards again. Why do I say so?
During 2006 AGM of UMNO many a delegates of UMNO made seditious statements, were they sued for making seditious statements?
During 1993 Mahathir proposed the constitutional amendments to deprive the legal immunity of Sultans and the royal families then a lot of BN leaders supported the constitutional amendments and humiliated the royal families. were they sued ?
Lastly, I feel that who makes seditious statements is not decided by the Seditious Act but by the powerful leaders.
#49 by Tickler on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 10:17 pm
But can you imagine a Malay raising issues pertaining, for example, to the status of the Sultans and the Agong. – undergrad2
UMNO has done that, and that`s reality not imagination. It resulted in the Royalty losing their powers.
#50 by dawsheng on Sunday, 11 May 2008 - 11:16 pm
The Royalty will not lose their powers if they stand on the right side, behind the Rakyat.