Then perhaps you should “enlighten” PAS Vice President on the importance of English. Why on earth Mohd Sabu joined the protest walk to Istane Negara?

Dear Ibl, yes UMNO did protest but finally it accepted with heavy heart the decision of Raja of Perlis. Now it is PR’s time to accept the Sultan of Perak’s decision.

If Karpal is charged under the Internal Security Act, the presumption of innocence does not apply as he would have to prove his innocence. The burden of proof is on the other foot.

It is not important that Karpal is being charged for sedition. What is important is that due process be given to anyone charged for a crime. It would appear that Karpal has the benefit of due process. He could have been detained under the Internal Security Act in which case it would be easier to deny him the rights of due process.

Today at 12: 11.03 (8 hours ago)
Wannabe Judge and lawyer, who do not know …”

“Who do not know”?? Please write in grammatical English.

This is what a product of the NEP is all about i.e. the same type who demands unequivocally that the teaching of Mathematics and Science be only in Malay.

Awak bercakap pakai kepala lutut agaknya – sudah banyak kes UMNO kalah dan bersalah dan mahkamah yang sama membebaskan Anwar.

Dan mahkamah yang sama akan mengadili Karpal – kenapa ada dwi persepsi !!!”

Berani buat berani tanggung, kenapa rasa cemas untuk didakwa… bukankah seseroang itu tidak bersalah sehingga dibuktikan bersalah oleh mahkamah.”

Mat,

Definisi hang kat mane? Ape maksud hang “banyak kes kalah….”? Contoh? Bila? Dimana? dan jugak … SIAPA?

Kes bebas Anwar tu psl tiada bukti nak sabit. bukan psl kes tu dibicara atau tidak. itupun lepas 6 thn…

Tiada dwi persepsi. Kapal nak kes dia tu dibicara di bukan sekadar di mahkamah tinggi tetapi ke mahkamah persekutuan. tiada siapa nak bimbang. biar kes tu dibawa ke mana2 mahkamah.

Ni hang tiada “basis” dlm komentar hang tu….

Today at 12: 14.27 (1 hour ago)
Dear Readers,

“Suara Rakyat Suara Keramat”.
==============================

Tetapi UMNO, BN dan Najib pekak dan buta.

“Suara Rakyat Suara Keramat”.

Mr. Karpal had only expressed the voice of the common man regarding the Perak Commedy.

One cannot honestly deny that the common man is very unhappy and very angry indeed at what had happened in the Perak palace.

Charging Mr. Karpal with sedition tantamounts to attempt by the powers to silence the Rakyat.

Can they?

I believe, the Rakyat will take effective measures come the next General Elections to show who really is supreme in a democracy.

Cheers, Hidup Malaysia.
Hidup Rakyat Malaysia!!

Raja Chulan.

Re your posting Today at 10: 24.17 (1 hour ago), you’re correct that intent is not relevant in sedition. However what was said and proposed to be done by Karpal is, irrespective of intent, qualifies, as non-seditious by objective measure of (a) and (b) stated in Sedition Act set out per my earlier posting at 06: 56.23 above.

Karpal has not tried to incite the people to rise and overthrow the monarchy.

Let’s not forget that the late Tunku Abdul Rahman had mentioned in a book of his almost 40 years ago that Dr.M had suggested to him that the constitutional monarchy in Malaysia should be replaced by the republic system.

Isn’t that much more seditious than what Karpal had said or done?

Intent has no relevance under the Sedition Act 1948. The test is objective. Check it out.

What Karpal Singh did was merely to suggest that what former PM TDM said be brought to the final arbiter – the courts – for determination, a necessary part of the proceedings of which, based on legal procedures, would necessarily have to include HRH the Ruler as a party to proceedings as maker, in HRH official capacity, of the peremptory decision (constituting the subject matter for judicial review) to directly replace Mohd Nizar with Zamri as Perak MB.

Sedition as a criminal offence will apply only if there were an intent on the part of offender by speech or action to bring hatred and contempt and incite disaffection amongst people against the Ruler.

It does not apply in Karpal’s case where the primary intent is to establish the constitutionality and legality of a Ruler’s official act. It were not as if Karpal’s intent was to question any right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative of a Ruler per se.

Karpal being one of the country’s foremost criminal lawyer will know the Sedition Act and law better than those who would recommkend charging him with an offence under that Act!

Indeed the Sedition Act is clear in its wordings that (I quote) “an act, speech, words, publication or other thing shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that it has a tendency —
(a) to show that any Ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures;
(b) to point out errors or defects in any Government or
constitution as by law established (except in respect of
any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty
or prerogative… otherwise than in relation to the implementation of any provision relating thereto) or in legislation or in the administration of justice with a view to the remedying of the errors.

Karpal is no more “seditious” than TDM is – looking at what the latter said broadly and by their implications.

Actually both are not, if one goes strictly by the law as stated in the Sedition Act.

As for Gobind’s unreasonable suspension,do not despair.
blog n publicize the whole issues as much as possible.
the suspension has brought fuels n further widen the discussion on Altatuya !

BEST wishes to Karpal,Gobind,n ALL the good leaders in PAKATAN !!