Get rid of Sedition Act before it causes more harm to nation

Viktor Wong

The Sedition Act should be abolished as soon as possible before it is manipulated further to the detriment of the nation. It is very clear that the Sedition Act has been abused for mostly political reasons by those in power.

The Sedition Act does not serve its original purpose anymore but is a mere political tool for those in power to maintain their grip, protecting their personal interests and covering up whatever wrongdoings they have committed.

In 1993, the then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad initiated an amendment to the Federal Constitution to curb the powers of the Malay rulers and to subject their actions to the relevant laws via a Special Court.

When the late DAP national chairman Karpal Singh used the amendment initiated by Mahathir in 1993 to state that the Perak Sultan had committed an error in recognising Umno’s power grab in Perak in February 2009, the Sedition Act was used to charge Karpal with instigating a rebellion against the palace.

At the 2006 Umno annual general assembly, Umno delegates and leaders from Melaka, Perlis and Terengganu made several statements which are deemed to be seditious because they threatened Malaysians with the spectre of May 13 racial riots, but until today none of them has been charged under the Sedition Act for inciting hate and bloodshed despite the many police reports lodged against them.

When a top analyst from a renowned public policy research institute publicly reported that the 30 per cent Bumiputera equity has been achieved and the government should therefore consider doing away with the decades-old New Economic Policy (NEP), many Umno leaders condemned the report and supporters of the party then called for the analyst to be charged under the Sedition Act. As a result, the analyst was removed from the institution he was attached to.

When the leader of a racist and extremist group, Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali, called for the Bible to be burned and destroyed, he was not charged under the Sedition Act although his words and actions were clearly seditious.

When the then Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail branded Chinese and Indians as “pendatang” and “penduduk sementara”, he was not charged under the Sedition Act despite the fact that his statement was seen as inciting hate. Instead, Umno only suspended his party membership for three years but his suspension was later lifted within a year due to “good behaviour”. Ahmad has since returned to active politics in the division he once led.

In aftermath of the 2008 general election, when former Terengganu menteri besar Datuk Idris Jusoh was not reappointed to his position due to the Sultan’s refusal to acknowledge his reappointment, Idris rallied his supporters to protest against the Sultan in front of the palace and called on all Umno state assemblymen to boycott the first sitting of the Terengganu state legislative assembly.

Even though Idris had clearly demonstrated his rebellious manner, and some of his supporters had even carried banners calling the ruler “natang”, which means animal in the local dialect, in front of the palace, the former menteri besar was never charged under the Sedition Act for rebelling against the state’s ruler and inciting hate on the palace.

When Seri Delima state assemblyman RSN Rayer of Penang condemned Umno by uttering the word “celaka Umno” during the state legislative assembly sitting, he was charged under the Sedition Act for allegedly “insulting the Malays and Islam” although it was very clear that Rayer has only condemned Umno, not the Malay race or Islam.

This means the Sedition Act has been converted into Umno Protection Act instead. We wonder if the authorities would act in the same manner if someone were to say “celaka PKR”, “celaka DAP”, “celaka MCA”, “celaka MIC”, “celaka PAS”, “celaka Gerakan” or whatsoever which starts with the word “celaka”? We really doubt that.

When Perkasa information chief Ruslan Kassim publicly warned that anyone who insulted the Malays and Islam would be beheaded, he too was not charged under the Sedition Act or the Penal Code for criminal intimidation. Ruslan later claimed that his beheading threat should not be taken literally. So, does that mean anyone can make such remarks, only to backtrack by saying it was just a figure of speech?

Then, recently Umno deputy president and Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said that a repeat of the May 13 racial riots was possible if people were to continue challenging and questioning Malay rights and Islam. Just exactly who is trying to challenge and question Malay rights and Islam? Until now, Muhyiddin has failed to name those who are doing this or attempting to do so.

What kind of words, statements or actions amounts to sedition has been determined politically all this while without any clear definition on how a word, statement or action would be deemed seditious.

The majority of those who are inciting hate and destruction out there are still free and they are still repeating their acts. Even the authorities are afraid to haul them up although so many police reports were lodged against them.

It is very clear that whatever is carried out by Umno or pro-Umno organisations is acceptable while the actions of the opposition or political dissenters are easily deemed seditious. Is there really a law in this way?