Who is going to be counsel for Minister of Finance at the PRPC (if, and assuming Tony Pua succeeds in referring the former to PRPC for making misleading statement on re-issuance of sports betting licence to Ascot Sports)? The Attorney General?

If as what R. Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) says – that by Standing Order 83 Rule 7A allows the right to counsel during the hearing – then Anwar should be accorded that right: thats the end of the matter. No two ways about it.

Actually this argument about whether Anwar should be given right to counsel is not the main issue. The main issue is whether he ought to have been referred to Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee (PRPC) in the first place for breach of parliamentary privilege. He is accused of “misleading” Parliament for saying APCO has Jewish links and that 1 Malaysia was copied from 1 Israel. APCO’s worldwide CEO will be coming to testify that what Anwar said is untrue.

The key question is : so what if Anwar’s said is untrue or cannot be proven by him true or if PRPC finds it false and misleading?

Let me just ask this question: how many things said by MPs on either side of the aisle – whether BN or PR can stand the test of verification? To refer Anwar to PRPC for his allegatiuons is to evince a complete lack of understanding of what is “freedom of speech” of which not only ordinary citizens enjoy as a constitutional right but their MPs would enjoy doubly more under Parliamentary Immunity in Parliament. That immunity stops where statements are seditious but since when does it stop just because it is false and misleading?

Freedom of speech encompasses the right to say the true as well as erroneous/misleading things! This is the gist of what the greatest proponent of Free Speech John Stuart Mill said in his treatise “On Liberty” in justification of all kind of speeches whether true or untrue: If opinion expressed is right and true every one benefits from it; if the opinion is erroneous and false it shopuld still be expressed so that those who hold the truth can argue debate and expose its fallacies so that in that contestation between error against truth, error may be exposed, and truth be giver “clearer and livelier impression”….

In that spirit what Anwar said about APCO’s Jewish link and 1 Malaysia carbonm coipy of 1 Isreal should be debated in Parliament and exposed by BN MPs as false. Are we saying that by virtue of BN MPs not having the capability to argue and debate rationally to rebut Anwar and expose the falsity of his statements in open chamber Anwar should be assigned to some smaller committee like PRPC to be adjudged by a Committee dominated by opposing political faction as deliberately “misleading” of Parliament and therefore punished?

This negates the whole idea of Free Speech: it negates because it assumes MPs cannot make statements unproven false or misleading when ¾ of parliamentary speeches in Parliaments all over the world in political contestation and mud sliging cannot pass the test of verification and truth! Come on if Anwar has made this allegation as a politician outside Parliament, and not MP within, what action would be taken against him and how does the PRPC come in? Its a joke that he gets punished for saying things in a place he is supposed top enjoy immunity where he’s likely not be outside! Anwar has documents to prove his case. Supposing he draws the wrong conclusions from these documents, he is illogical in arguments, his conclusions misleading – so what?? Unless he fabricated and forged documents to further his case, whatever he does is under umbrella of Freedom of Speech, that refering him to PRPC negates and shows a lack of understanding of what Freedom of Speech is about.

This referring of Anwar to Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee (PRPC) smacks of unfairness. As I said if his allegations linking APCO and Jews and 1 Malaysia to 1 Israel are misleading, why not debate and expose his fallacies on the floor – but why refer him to PRPC with the decision to so refer being made not because it is a right thing to do but because Umno-BN lawmakers who are majority could flex their muscle to do so by votes, subjecting him to be tried (once again) by a panel (PRPC) equally dominated by BN law makers? It really matters not whether he is given right to counsel or not because he expects to be found guilty anyway and to get suspended.

The calculation here on the ruling coalition’s side is that whatever punishment meted to him by PRPC – and even if Anwar were to taken to task for taking to road reformasi protests over his possible suspension by PRPC – will not be condemned by Uncle Sam this time around because Anwar here has linked the American company APCO to Zionists and made statements perceived anti-Semitic, especially when he had just recently led a demonstration to protest the Freedom Flotilla in front of the American Embassy, against the Americans for what Israel’s commandoes had allegedly done.

Anwar is, by his recent anti Israel rhetoric banking, on Malay Muslim support for whatever he does but should he miscalculate, and that should some of support shift back to Najib [ whose approval rating has supposedly hit a record high at 72 percent according to independent pollster Merdeka Centre], Anwar might not be able to count on US’s backing this time around.