Any one of the strange laws we suffer is a compromise between a fad and a vested interest.
– Gilbert K. Chesterton, English philosopher
With the battle for the six state elections in Malaya heating up, the plot thickened as Perikatan Nasional’s (PN) election chairman and Kedah Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Sanusi Md Nor was charged.
The story was simple, the controversial figure went a bit too far in one of his ceramah and he is facing the music for it. But then again, this is how everyone sees it. Especially PN supporters – who held Sanusi in high reverence. To them, this is a warrior – their warrior.
The story of Sanusi is one that does not follow the usual storyline where an up-and-coming politician is an aristocrat and has been groomed to replace their family members or relatives in a leadership position.
Sanusi’s story is one about a village boy who turned his life around, one who was raised in poverty and made it to the big leagues on his own accord.
He was only elected as an ADUN in Kedah after 14th general election (GE14), the same election when Barisan Nasional (BN) collapsed and was replaced by Pakatan Harapan (PH) as federal government.
Yet two years after that, he was the Kedah Menteri Besar. It was a meteoric rise for what people would describe as a maverick figure.
I think the adoration by people, not only limited to those in Kedah but also across Malaysia towards Sanusi, was because of his charisma.
He tells it as it is. He is smart, while coming across as someone’s uncle. His connection to the people is something politicians would do their best to emulate.
That is why it was big news when his arrest was publicised – at 3 am in the morning and being transported in an SUV to a police station.
The point of argument by many people is that this was not a petty criminal, thief or drug dealer – he is a sitting menteri besar.
Of course, the government would defend it as being a normal arrest in a country where the “rule of law” is being upheld, and some might agree with this, but not all.
The charge that was made against him was under Section 4(1)(a) of the Sedition Act for making seditious remarks.
There is a wave of sentiments that if a powerful figure in this case, a menteri besar can be treated as such, what chance does the ordinary rakyat stand?
The Sedition Act 1948 is a law prohibiting discourse deemed as seditious. The act was originally enacted by the colonial authorities of British Malaya in 1948 to contain the local communist insurgence.
But then again, now, and probably many times in the past, it is used to contain threats that are more political in nature.
Lawyer and former de facto law minister Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim on Thursday said the Sedition Act is so broad in scope that even fair criticism and innocent statements can be interpreted as insulting or derogatory or causing harm to public order.
In the same vein, Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) director Zaid Malek also urged Attorney General Tan Sri Idrus Harun to withdraw the sedition charges against Sanusi.
He viewed that just as it was invalid for previous governments to use the Sedition Act against Pakatan Harapan leaders and political opponents, the same can be said now of Sanusi’s two seditious charges.
“No legitimate government can be allowed to wield the powers conferred by these laws. The Sedition Act should no longer be part of our criminal justice system and should be consigned to the trash-heap of our colonial past,” he said.
The issue with such draconian acts is that reformists who were previously calling for its repeal when in opposition is standing by it when in government. It is a tool, a very powerful political tool.
Similarly, Muda and Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) in a joint statement said it was time for Malaysia to follow its other Commonwealth partners and abolish the Act.
“We strongly reject the statement made by Sanusi which was immature and shallow, where it was made on a political talk platform. However, we reject the use of the Sedition Act against him and call for this Act to be abolished.”
The Sedition Act is one that is now on everyone’s mouth. Regardless of how Pakatan fares in the state polls, addressing the archaic law is something they have to think about.
It would reflect the sincerity of the present government. Essentially, they can’t have the cake and eat it too.
The views expressed here are those of the columnist and do not necessarily represent the views of New Sarawak Tribune.
