The said motion on the Attorney General was tabled at the 70th Malaysian Bar AGM, was discussed, considered and adopted as a Resolution of the Malaysian Bar. See post for the adopted resolution:-
Malaysian Bar calls on Mohamed Apandi Ali to immediately resign as Attorney General, for the good of Malaysia...
Section 42(1) Legal Profession Act 1976The purpose of the Malaysian Bar shall be -(a) to uphold the cause of justice without regard to its own interests or that of its members, uninfluenced by fear or favour;...
(d) where requested so to do, to express its view on matters affecting legislation and the administration and practice of the law in Malaysia;
It must be pointed out that the Malaysian Bar and many people are against the draconian Sedition Act, and has repeatedly called for its repeal. Find below a report of the Malaysian.
The Malaysian Bar convened an Extraordinary General Meeting (“EGM”) on 19 Sept 2014 to condemn the use and continued use of the Sedition Act 1948.At that EGM, the Bar resoundingly resolved to hold a peaceful assembly to protest the recent spate of arrests, charges and investigations under the Sedition Act 1948 (“Act”), in its “Resolution against the Sedition Act, other laws and actions taken which stifle speech and expression, and matters in connection therewith”.The Bar Council then had the Walk for Peace and Freedom 2014 (“Walk”) at 10:30 am on 16 Oct 2014, which was attended by about 2,000 lawyers, and others calling for the repeal of the Sedition Act. (see below for the full report obtained from the Malaysian Bar Website.)
An extract of that 2014 Resolution of the Malaysian Bar is as follows:-
(C) The Malaysian Bar condemns the use and continued use of the Sedition Act 1948, in particular its selective use, and the excessive sentences meted out by the Judiciary.(D) The Malaysian Bar calls upon the Malaysian Government to abide by its pledge to repeal the Sedition Act 1948, and to forthwith repeal the Sedition Act 1948.(E) The Malaysian Bar calls on the Attorney General to forthwith withdraw all pending charges, cases and appeals, and to concede to all pending appeals, under the Sedition Act 1948 in the courts of Malaysia; and calls upon the Judiciary to prevent the systematic abuse of the Sedition Act 1948, and to uphold the rule of law and the right of all to freedom of speech and expression.(F) The Malaysian Bar calls upon the Malaysian Government to forthwith impose a moratorium on the use of the Sedition Act 1948 pending its repeal, and for the police to cease all investigations pursuant to the Sedition Act 1948.
Now, members of the Bar are being investigated under the Sedition Act, and this is unacceptable.
Lawyers behind motion for AG's removal summoned under Sedition Act
Lawyers who submitted the motion to discuss attorney-general Mohamed
Apandi Ali's position for refusing to prosecute Prime Minister Najib
Abdul Razak over deposits in his personal bank accounts have been
summoned by police under the Sedition Act.
Francis Pereira, one of
three lawyers who proposed the motion at the Malaysian Bar annual
general assembly (AGM) on March 19, confirmed that he received a letter
from Bukit Aman.
Pereira added that his colleague, R Shanmugam, who was another proposer of the motion, also received the letter.
"The Bukit Aman letter clearly states that it is with regard to a police report made on the motion presented at the Bar AGM.
"They said the investigation is under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act," he told Malaysiakini when contacted.
Section 4(1) concerns offences that have a seditious tendency.
Pereira (photo)
said he and Shanmugam were summoned to give their witness statements
under Section 112, but is not clear whether they would merely be
facilitating investigations or may become the subject of the
investigation.
He described the police investigation as "shocking" and an intrusion into the Malaysian Bar's independence.
"We are shocked and surprised that the police have taken this investigation to the lawyers.
"Clearly, this was a motion debated at out AGM, which was a closed-door meeting.
"There
is no basis for opening an investigation into our motion and it is
definitely an intrusion into the independence of the Bar," he said.
The motion, after being debated at the Malaysian Bar AGM, resulted in a resolution calling for Apandi's resignation.
According to the letter sighted by Malaysiakini, it was issued by Bukit Aman's Criminal Investigation Department.
Pereira and Shanmugam were told to present themselves at the Bukit Aman police headquarters at 2.30pm on Thursday.
Presence requested
Later
today, the third proposer Charles Hector said he too finally received a
similar letter requesting his presence at the same date and venue.
Hector said he was shocked by the investigation, adding that the use of the Sedition Act was also "wrong".
"The
Malaysian Bar has been consistent against the Sedition Act, it is a
draconian law. Even the truth is not a defence," he said.
Elaborating
on the motion, Hector said there was nothing "unusual" about it as the
Malaysian Bar had in the past proposed various reforms and this motion
was no exception.
Hector added the three movers only proposed the
motion for discussion but it was the Malaysian Bar which ultimately
passed the resolution on Apandi with overwhelming majority.
"I'm
wondering why the police are calling in the movers of the motion
because, yes, we moved the motion, (but) it is something that can be
discussed, changed and amended.
"It was voted on and the overwhelming majority passed the resolution. Targeting the movers is something very wrong," he said.
In
passing the resolution, the Malaysian Bar had noted that it "continues
doing all that is necessary to promote the rule of law, and a just
administration of justice in Malaysia".
The full text of the resolution can be read here.
- Malaysiakini, 29/3/2016
Source: Malaysian Bar Website
| Walk for Peace and Freedom 2014 | Repeal the Sedition Act! (16 Oct 2014) |
|
|
|
| Thursday, 20 November 2014 09:14am | |||||
Contributed
by Joane Sharmila, Editor and Chin Oy Sim, Deputy CEO, and photos by
Mohamad Fazli b Rosman and Jul Indra Tofan b Jahrul, Administrative
Assistants, Bar Council
The
Malaysian Bar convened an Extraordinary General Meeting (“EGM”) on 19
Sept 2014 to condemn the use and continued use of the Sedition Act
1948.
At
that EGM, the Bar resoundingly resolved to hold a peaceful assembly to
protest the recent spate of arrests, charges and investigations under
the Sedition Act 1948 (“Act”), in its “Resolution
against the Sedition Act, other laws and actions taken which stifle
speech and expression, and matters in connection therewith”.
The
Bar Council determined that the Walk for Peace and Freedom 2014
(“Walk”) was to take place at 10:30 am on 16 Oct 2014. The Bar Council
Secretariat was abuzz with activity immediately after the Bar’s recent
biennial International Malaysia Law Conference 2014 held
from 24 to 26 Sept 2014, as the Bar Council’s planning team as well as
the Secretariat staff made extensive preparations for the Walk.
On
the momentous day, there was an air of palpable excitement as
Secretariat staff, volunteer marshals (who comprised Members of the
Bar), representatives of civil society, and above all, a throng of
lawyers in their customary chamber attire, began gathering and mingling
at the Padang Merbok car park off Jalan Parlimen in Kuala Lumpur from as
early as 9:30 am.
Secretariat
staff enthusiastically handed out bottles of water, and caps, badges,
placards and banners produced for the Walk, which proclaimed the
taglines “#MansuhAktaHasutan” and “#RepealSeditionAct” and spotlighted
the Walk.
At
approximately 10:40 am, Christopher Leong, President of the Malaysian
Bar, took to the stage with words of inspiration, rousing and reminding
the crowd about the purpose of the Walk, and its significance both today
and for future generations. He thanked the participants for having
turned up in significant numbers to voice their opposition against the
Act and to support the Bar’s initiative in organising the Walk.
Syahredzan
Johan, Chairperson of the National Young Lawyers Committee and
organiser of the Bar’s #Mansuh Akta Hasutan campaign, and Firdaus Husni,
Chairperson of the Constitutional Law Committee, in their individual
addresses, delineated how the archaic Act, which was put in place during
colonial times, and which has served to stifle the growth of democracy
in the country, should have been removed from the laws of the nation
many decades ago.
Steven
Thiru, Vice-President of the Malaysian Bar, next reminded the crowd how
Malaysians are now living in a climate of fear due to the Act.
Ravinder Singh Dhalliwal, the Kuala Lumpur Bar’s Representative to the
Bar Council, further fired up the crowd with his thundering voice,
repeatedly asking, “If there is something wrong with Malaysian law, who
do you look for?!” and the crowd consistently and heartily replied,
“Malaysian Bar!”
After
impassioned speeches from Richard Wee Thiam Seng, Secretary of the
Malaysian Bar, Karen Cheah Yee Lynn, Treasurer of the Malaysian Bar, and
Andrew Khoo Chin Hock, Co-Chairperson of the Human Rights Committee,
Christopher Leong once again took to the stage to inspire the crowd one
last time by leading in a recitation of the preamble and tenets of
Rukunegara.
By
11:15 am, the crowd of lawyers had swelled to approximately 1,000
individuals, with many non-lawyers in plain clothes also visible in the
assembly.
The
historic moment that everyone had been looking forward to, began to
unfold at 11:35 am. The frontliners — Christopher Leong, Steven Thiru,
Richard Wee Thiam Seng, Karen Cheah Yee Lynn, Syahredzan Johan, Andrew
Khoo, and Honey Tan — led the approximately 2,000-strong crowd
consisting of lawyers, civil society representatives including members
of the Orang Asli community, writers and artistes against the Act, and
likely some members of the public as well, towards the Malaysian
Parliament. Ravinder Singh Dhalliwal and Avinder Singh marched
alongside as the proud banner bearers.
Spotted
in the procession were Adam Adli, student activist; Haris Ibrahim,
activist; Kee Thuan Chye, actor and dramatist; and even activist “Auntie
Bersih”!
Observers from various foreign bar associations and the diplomatic corps in Malaysia1 stood apart from the main gathering, visible in their bright blue vests.
Throughout
the speeches and Walk, there were the continuous mantras of “Mansuh,
Mansuh, Akta Hasutan!”, and “Hidup, Hidup, Rakyat Malaysia!” being
chanted. A segment of the crowd, including Syahredzan Johan, sang
patriotic songs to continue to drum up the spirits of the crowd.
Banners and placards calling for the repeal of the Act were present
throughout, and as the participants walked towards Parliament, they drew
cheers and honks of support from drivers moving along the route.
 
The
slow but steady march to the Parliament was facilitated by the presence
of the police and the Bar Council-appointed marshals, who ensured the
crowd kept to the pavements, and the efforts of traffic police who
helped control the traffic flow and ensure the safety of the
participants.
At
11:55 am, the leaders spearheading the Walk reached the designated
spot, a few hundred metres before the Parliament building. Ten
representatives from the Malaysian Bar — including the seven previously
mentioned frontliners — were allowed through the police barricade to
deliver the Bar’s “Open Memorandum to the Prime Minister: Towards a Peaceful, United and Harmonious Malaysia”.
While
waiting for the representatives, the participants braved the heat,
keeping the cheery atmosphere alive by snapping photos, singing the
national anthem, and even chanting “Merdeka!”
  
At
1:00 pm, the representatives finally returned to cheers from the crowd,
as Christopher Leong proudly announced that the goal of the Walk had
been achieved, and that the Memorandum had been submitted to Dato’ Mah
Siew Keong, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, who accepted
the Memorandum on behalf of the Prime Minister. The President also
informed that Dato’ Mah Siew Keong had assured the Bar that the
suggestions put forward in the Memorandum would be considered.
Christopher Leong acknowledged the professionalism of the Royal Malaysia Police, and thanked them for a fantastic job.
Syahredzan
Johan promised that the Walk was just the beginning of the campaign to
repeal the Act, and that the fight against the Act would not end until
the Act is finally abolished!
With
those closing remarks, the crowd dispersed after what had been an
eventful and gratifying morning of involvement in support of the rule of
law and human rights.
In
the run-up to the Walk for Peace and Freedom, the Malaysian Bar
received an unprecedented number of statements of support, particularly
from foreign bar associations and law societies, as listed below.
Statements of support from foreign bar associations and law societies
Statements of support from other organisations
1 The observers included representatives from Commonwealth Lawyers Association, LAWASIA, Law Council of Australia, Law Society of England and Wales, Union Internationale des Avocats, International Commission of Jurists, British High Commission, Delegation of the European Union, Embassy of Norway, Embassy of the USA and High Commission of Canada. | |||||
SEDITION LAWS - ANTITHESIS TO A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY
ReplyDeleteThe very same judge, NH Chan (former JCA) who decided upon the landmark issue of sedition has written a very enlightening prelude & article here :
http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/letters_others/sedition_under_the_law_of_this_country_n.h._chan.html
The highly persuasive authority of the Privy Council in Hector v. Attorney-General of Antigua and Barbuda (1990) 2 AC 312 (Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) :
Importance of Freedom of Expression
The Court emphasised the importance of freedom of expression in a democratic system :
In a free democratic society it is almost too obvious to need stating that those who hold office in government and who are responsible for public administration must always be open to criticism. Any attempt to stifle or fetter such criticism amounts to censorship of the most insidious and objectionable kind.
https://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/2506/en/privy-council:-hector-v.-attorney-general-of-antigua-and-barbuda
The reasonings given above are highly definitive.