Sedition-"conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch".
It is noteworthy that Ambga Srinivasan a self proclaimed constitutional expert should come out swinging, cloaked in the garb of a human rights lawyer this time, to protest the use of the sedition act to attack a political opponent.
The irony of such comments by Ambiga referred to in this article I am sure is not lost on any intelligent and independent minded observer of Malaysian politics.
Ambiga is on the record for having of her own admission in her activities as head of Bersih, admitting to having committed the offence of sedition by definition.
The offense of seeking to, inciting by speech, words and actions and agitating to overthrow the government of his majesty the King of Malaysia through Bersih's riots is sedition. In fact extends further to treason. By getting rid of the legislation, Anwar or anyone else cannot remove the fact it is an offence to do those things the current Act of sedition identifies and defines as sedition.
To abolish the legislation on sedition altogether does is to legitimise the unlawful overthrow of the Agong and the Raja Raja Melayu and their governments.
There are the conventions of the constitution and the common law that support the theory and principle of law that, attempts and incitement to overthrow governments is unlawful and seditious. Has anyone ever actually give a thought to what the rule of law and equality before the law means?
To charge Sanusi for the offence of Sedition, using a poorly defined and drafted piece of legislation (revised in 1969) which has its genesis in a totally different era of Malaysian politics in 1948 during the communist insurgency and the birth of Malay Nationalism is an absurdity.
It is not just folly to do so but dammned downright reinforcement and an indictment on Malaysia's legal fraternity, its governments (advised by them) and the courts misunderstanding if not ignorance of how the constitution and the law operates or is required to operate.
As if the embarassment of jailing a sitting member of parliament in DS Najib without due process was not enough discomfiture, the courts in Malaysia now seek to buttress their reputation as idiots by charging Sanusi ofr Sedition; or
as Michael Bassey Johnson put it : “You'll make a bundle of blunders if you consider yourself too clever to look at anothers work.”
Inconsistency in the application of laws is dangerous and should not be followed by any validly constituted court or tribunal. For it creates a precedent by which other courts and tribunals, and subsequent governments and defendants will rely on the inconcistent application of this example when defending a charge of sedition as a valid defense.
To charge Sanusi for under Sedition laws dilutes the validity and the power of the law and further erode the integrity of the Parliament that makes these laws.
Once again I am reminded of Ambiga Srinivasan and Tommy Thomas's irredeemable performances in acts of sedition.
If the laws of sedition could not or would not be equally applied to Ambiga and Thomas, then how could it be applied fairrly to Sanusi? Where lies the exception in the constitution or in the criminal code to justify charging Sanusi on the offence of sedition whilst allowing Ambiga, Thomas and various members of the Malaysian Bar to go Scot free for committing similar offences.
All that these charges against Sanusi and people like him do is it to make a martyr of him and embolden the growing Malay Muslim constituency of PAS.
The truth is no government will ever dare or be foolish enough to legislate to legitimize a threat to overthrow it in office especially if that is through illegal undemocratic means by abilishing the sedition act.
Perhaps Malaysia with the quality of its legal and judicial fraternity may be an exception to this presumption.
Even US has its Patriots Act, snaked in a few months past 9/11. It also has Operations Vigilante Eagle designed to bring in veterans who object to the government’s unethical conduct of wars. In the Patriots Act there is the all encompassing charge of Treason against the US. So Malaysia is not alone
On the contrary,I think this action against Sanusi will actually work against the Madanon govt. Anwar has always talked for years about & pressed for the abolishment of the archaic Sedition Act etc. KDN has also said that they will retain Sosma.Anwar has again shown the rakyat that he doesn’t walk the talk. The rakyat’s perception is that this is a clear case of political persecution & his coalition will pay dearly in the PRN’s.
A "charge sheet" or outline of list of charges in a police matter (criminal matter) need not be prepared
in its entirety for a suspect to be charged on any count.
All that is required is for a police prosecutor is to have the person arrested and formally charged by being brought before a magistrated to be bailed as soon as is practicably possible. The evidence of the charge need only be a sworn statement by the arresting officer attesting to his version of the offence allegedly committed by the defendant.
The prosecutor then seeks an extension of time based on the nature of the offense and the need for gatherring further evidence which is normally granted by a magistrate. The extension by which time the prosecutor provides the full facts of the case and the evidence to go with it iss when the meat and not the bare bones is put together by the prosecution (the police).
A prima facie set of evidentiary materials would have been the broadcast and news print words of the defendant Sanussi.
The Attorney General's consent need no longer be secured before a person is charged in these matters as the Najib trial has shown.
In fact Sanusi should have been the subject of a complaint formally lodged with parliament . Thats where the process belongs where parliamentarians are to be charged. Not in an ordinary court. It all relates to the indemnities that protect his majesty's MP's. This is the embarrassment with the Malaysian legal fraternity and its judges. They have a very low level of knowledge as to how the constitution and the laws really work.
The state assembly itself. The state assembly is a unicameral parlaiment at state level. Failing this the matter ought to have been referred to the constitutional court for an opinion at least. Judging by the long history of ineptitude and demonstrated ignorance exhibited by judges and lawyers in Malaysia in recent years, Zanusi may need to force the issue out into the open by taking it to a multi lateral forum where Malaysia's judiciary have no jurisdiction or authority to participate.
First, it is very nice of the Sultan to not accept Sanusi's earlier apology. The Tuanku resolve that Sanusi did not offend him, so what apology?
The Tuanku also happen to be familiar with the Pattani accent (and slang) used by Sanusi to deliver his many speeches and agree it is not offending him, the Sovereign.
The Tuanku simply smiled and are additionally pleased with further clarification by the Pas State Commissioner to him.
The Tuanku dislike Pmx habits of creating chaos.The last one in 2009, in Perak by burning effigies of the late Sultan Perak and by getting Raja Nazrin's car window broken by pmx violent 'reformasi' boys.
This is also why Tuanku failed Pmx 'kajang move', swore in his political enemies as MB and withdraw pmx's datoship from the palace in 2014.
Sanusi is touching down at alor star airport in 3 mins. He scored again!
Sedition-"conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch".
It is noteworthy that Ambga Srinivasan a self proclaimed constitutional expert should come out swinging, cloaked in the garb of a human rights lawyer this time, to protest the use of the sedition act to attack a political opponent.
The irony of such comments by Ambiga referred to in this article I am sure is not lost on any intelligent and independent minded observer of Malaysian politics.
Ambiga is on the record for having of her own admission in her activities as head of Bersih, admitting to having committed the offence of sedition by definition.
The offense of seeking to, inciting by speech, words and actions and agitating to overthrow the government of his majesty the King of Malaysia through Bersih's riots is sedition. In fact extends further to treason. By getting rid of the legislation, Anwar or anyone else cannot remove the fact it is an offence to do those things the current Act of sedition identifies and defines as sedition.
To abolish the legislation on sedition altogether does is to legitimise the unlawful overthrow of the Agong and the Raja Raja Melayu and their governments.
There are the conventions of the constitution and the common law that support the theory and principle of law that, attempts and incitement to overthrow governments is unlawful and seditious. Has anyone ever actually give a thought to what the rule of law and equality before the law means?
To charge Sanusi for the offence of Sedition, using a poorly defined and drafted piece of legislation (revised in 1969) which has its genesis in a totally different era of Malaysian politics in 1948 during the communist insurgency and the birth of Malay Nationalism is an absurdity.
It is not just folly to do so but dammned downright reinforcement and an indictment on Malaysia's legal fraternity, its governments (advised by them) and the courts misunderstanding if not ignorance of how the constitution and the law operates or is required to operate.
As if the embarassment of jailing a sitting member of parliament in DS Najib without due process was not enough discomfiture, the courts in Malaysia now seek to buttress their reputation as idiots by charging Sanusi ofr Sedition; or
as Michael Bassey Johnson put it : “You'll make a bundle of blunders if you consider yourself too clever to look at anothers work.”
Inconsistency in the application of laws is dangerous and should not be followed by any validly constituted court or tribunal. For it creates a precedent by which other courts and tribunals, and subsequent governments and defendants will rely on the inconcistent application of this example when defending a charge of sedition as a valid defense.
To charge Sanusi for under Sedition laws dilutes the validity and the power of the law and further erode the integrity of the Parliament that makes these laws.
Once again I am reminded of Ambiga Srinivasan and Tommy Thomas's irredeemable performances in acts of sedition.
If the laws of sedition could not or would not be equally applied to Ambiga and Thomas, then how could it be applied fairrly to Sanusi? Where lies the exception in the constitution or in the criminal code to justify charging Sanusi on the offence of sedition whilst allowing Ambiga, Thomas and various members of the Malaysian Bar to go Scot free for committing similar offences.
All that these charges against Sanusi and people like him do is it to make a martyr of him and embolden the growing Malay Muslim constituency of PAS.
The truth is no government will ever dare or be foolish enough to legislate to legitimize a threat to overthrow it in office especially if that is through illegal undemocratic means by abilishing the sedition act.
Perhaps Malaysia with the quality of its legal and judicial fraternity may be an exception to this presumption.
According to RPK, the charge sheet was not ready on the sanusi matter.
Hence it was not brought to the ag for him to decide.
The matter was brought before the court without a charge sheet?
And pmx think no one were going to find out?
Even US has its Patriots Act, snaked in a few months past 9/11. It also has Operations Vigilante Eagle designed to bring in veterans who object to the government’s unethical conduct of wars. In the Patriots Act there is the all encompassing charge of Treason against the US. So Malaysia is not alone
On the contrary,I think this action against Sanusi will actually work against the Madanon govt. Anwar has always talked for years about & pressed for the abolishment of the archaic Sedition Act etc. KDN has also said that they will retain Sosma.Anwar has again shown the rakyat that he doesn’t walk the talk. The rakyat’s perception is that this is a clear case of political persecution & his coalition will pay dearly in the PRN’s.
A "charge sheet" or outline of list of charges in a police matter (criminal matter) need not be prepared
in its entirety for a suspect to be charged on any count.
All that is required is for a police prosecutor is to have the person arrested and formally charged by being brought before a magistrated to be bailed as soon as is practicably possible. The evidence of the charge need only be a sworn statement by the arresting officer attesting to his version of the offence allegedly committed by the defendant.
The prosecutor then seeks an extension of time based on the nature of the offense and the need for gatherring further evidence which is normally granted by a magistrate. The extension by which time the prosecutor provides the full facts of the case and the evidence to go with it iss when the meat and not the bare bones is put together by the prosecution (the police).
A prima facie set of evidentiary materials would have been the broadcast and news print words of the defendant Sanussi.
The Attorney General's consent need no longer be secured before a person is charged in these matters as the Najib trial has shown.
In fact Sanusi should have been the subject of a complaint formally lodged with parliament . Thats where the process belongs where parliamentarians are to be charged. Not in an ordinary court. It all relates to the indemnities that protect his majesty's MP's. This is the embarrassment with the Malaysian legal fraternity and its judges. They have a very low level of knowledge as to how the constitution and the laws really work.
Sanusi is a state assemblyman, where shud his case b brought up other than the courts?
The state assembly itself. The state assembly is a unicameral parlaiment at state level. Failing this the matter ought to have been referred to the constitutional court for an opinion at least. Judging by the long history of ineptitude and demonstrated ignorance exhibited by judges and lawyers in Malaysia in recent years, Zanusi may need to force the issue out into the open by taking it to a multi lateral forum where Malaysia's judiciary have no jurisdiction or authority to participate.
Thank you for your response, much appreciated
First, it is very nice of the Sultan to not accept Sanusi's earlier apology. The Tuanku resolve that Sanusi did not offend him, so what apology?
The Tuanku also happen to be familiar with the Pattani accent (and slang) used by Sanusi to deliver his many speeches and agree it is not offending him, the Sovereign.
The Tuanku simply smiled and are additionally pleased with further clarification by the Pas State Commissioner to him.
The Tuanku dislike Pmx habits of creating chaos.The last one in 2009, in Perak by burning effigies of the late Sultan Perak and by getting Raja Nazrin's car window broken by pmx violent 'reformasi' boys.
This is also why Tuanku failed Pmx 'kajang move', swore in his political enemies as MB and withdraw pmx's datoship from the palace in 2014.
Sanusi is touching down at alor star airport in 3 mins. He scored again!
Wither PH?
Give him my regards and let him know not all Indians are ingrates. Many support him and what he stands for.
Sadly i now found out but hopefully not true, PN will not stand a chance. There maybe a hidden hand up there.🙏😌
Well its not really wins but whether the Sedition charge is justified.