The right of reply

Enough is enough. People who proclaim to fight for freedom of expression and free media but censors other's legitimate reply based on their whims and fancy, must realise that on the internet, they cannot suppress peoples' legitimate right to reply and express contrarian views. This blog welcomes all views. ~ Ellese

Those against Sedition Act don’t think.

2 Comments

I’m fairly convinced now that those who support the abolishment of the Sedition Act and replacing it with a new law called Racial and Religious Hate Crime Bill (“RRHBC”) by NUCC, not only have not read the two laws, but really don’t know what they want.

Why is this?

Because all the things that they condemn as racists and extremists are not only allowed under the new Bill, in fact it encourages one to incite a worse racial and religious hatred statement than currently is.

Meaning?

You see when Abdullah Zaik of Isma was reported to say about the Chinese “Who gave them citizenship and wealth until the results of their trespassing are protected until this day?…This was all the doing of the British, who were in cahoots with the Chinese to oppress and bully the Malays,”, many of the left were so angry as this incite racial hatred and even DAP lodged numerous police reports against it. Guan Eng then even called for the application of our Sedition Act.

You know what? Under the proposed racial and religious hate crime bill they are not only permitted to say this, they can say worse such as insulting the Chinese as a race. Why is that? Because under the new RRHBC, it is only a crime if there is a threat of physical harm. Meaning you can incite as much as you want so long there’s no incitement of physical harm, it’s not an offence.

Really? Section 4 of RRHBC states : “Whoever engages in conduct that is intended to threaten, incite, or incite others to threaten, physical harm towards another person or …property …on the basis of race is guilty of an offence…”. (See full law below)

So Guan Eng and the left including Ambiga and Negaraku cannot complain about Abdullah Zaik’s statement. In fact no one in this country should ever complain if one derogatorily calls the Chinese pendatang.

This really doesn’t make sense. That’s why I think those who support the abolishment of the Sedition Act and be replaced with RRHBC don’t know what they want but yet think they have a high moral ground. This is a most foolish and idiotic action.

By the same token please also note that under the proposed section 5 of RRHCB on incitement of religious hatred, you can derogatorily say anything about one’s religion, as much as you like, and still not committing an offence if there is no threat of physical harm. So one can say anything about Islam such as “Islam is a *#*&^@ religion” (put whatever you like) and its still not criminal incitement.

This is really crazy. It will only create more ill will and racial and religious hatred. Don’t know what NUCC is thinking? How can this have any semblance of achieving unity. And worse, the Bar Council appears to be supporting this anarchist state of affair. The Bar should stand against this. That’s why I said in my past posting the Bar Council is a major part of this mess we have, in championing unbridle rights.

Let’s go back to the constitutional compromise we have. The give and take our forefathers had. The value of “jaga hati orang lain” or emphatized with each other. We know we are different so we don’t purposely offend. We don’t unnecessarily provoke as it will invite a further provocative reaction. Stand back and think rationally.

——————————————————–

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Those against Sedition Act don’t think.

  1. Verbatim transcript if RRHBC

    “4. Incitement of racial hatred[2]

    (1) Whoever engages in conduct that is intended to threaten, incite, or incite others to threaten, physical harm towards another person or class of persons or property of that other person or class of persons on the basis of race is guilty of an offence and shall be punished with a fine of not more than RM5,000.00 or imprisonment of not more than 7 years or both.

    (2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), conduct may be constituted by a single occasion or by a number of occasions over a period of time.

    5. Incitement of religious hatred[3]

    (1) Whoever engages in conduct that is intended to threaten, incite, or incite others to threaten, physical harm towards another person or class of persons or property of that other person or class of persons on the basis of religious belief or activity is guilty of an offence and shall be punished with a fine of not more than RM5,000.00 or imprisonment of not more than 7 years or both.

    (2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), conduct may be constituted by a single occasion or by a number of occasions over a period of time.

    6. Physical harm on basis of racial and religious hatred[4]

    (1) Whoever engages in conduct with the intention to inflict or cause physical harm, or with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to inflict or cause physical harm, towards another person or class of persons or property of that other person or class of persons on the basis of race or religious belief or activity, and thereby inflict or cause physical harm is guilty of an offence and shall be punished with a fine of not more than RM10,000.00 or imprisonment of not more than 10 years or both.

    …..

    8. Repeals and savings

    (1) The Sedition Act 1948 [Act No. 15] is repealed.”

    Please note the fine is a fine of 5k only.

  2. Pingback: Gang of Six: 2 guilty and jailed, Haris plus 3 more awaiting trial | Helen Ang

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s