Kedah state executive councillor Haim Hilman Abdullah pleaded not guilty today to a charge of making a statement during a PAS ceramah that could potentially cause public fear or alarm, according to The Star....he was charged under Section 505(b) of the Penal Code, which provides for a maximum jail term of two years, a fine, or both upon conviction.
Let's look at what he said, and I feel he/she or others should never be charged for such statements - which interestingly raises matters of public interest - and thus what the Government(or Minister) should do is to INVESTIGATE the claims, and INFORM the Public the TRUTH - NO SALE of Public University places?, NO 'Back Door' entry to University?
And most importantly, what is government POLICY with regard entrance to PUBLIC Universities > in my opinion, since the amount of spots in Public Universities still CANNOT accommodate ALL Malaysian Students that qualify - the POLICY should be places in PUBLIC(Government) Universities should be ONLY for Malaysian Students, and will only be opened to limited foreign nationals ONCE there is no more Malaysian students that are seeking places in Public Universities.
Section 505 Penal Code - Statements conducing to public mischief
Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, rumour or report-
(a)...
(b) with intent to cause, or which his likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public where by any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquillity; or
(c) with intent to incite or which is likely to incite any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community of persons,
shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to two years or with fine or with both.
Exception - It does not amount to an offence within the meaning of this section, when the person making, publishing or circulating any such statement, rumour or report has reasonable grounds for believing that such statement, rumour or report is true and makes, publishes or circulates it without any such intent as aforesaid.
According to Media Reports, the issues raised by said Haim Hilman Abdullah ...
The charge relates to remarks he allegedly made claiming that public universities were selling admission places to wealthy individuals.
He also allegedly claimed that students seeking admission to the institutions could only enter through the “back door”.
Haim Hilman was also accused of claiming that deserving students who performed well in SPM, STPM, matriculation and Asasi programmes were denied places in competitive and critical courses because such places were being sold.
He further alleged that the government had not provided sufficient funding or places at the universities. - Malay Mail, 25/6/2026
Now, the statement that '...the government had not provided sufficient funding or places at the universities..' - well, many will agree. If the government had did so, then NO Malaysian students will be forced to spent so much to enter PRIVATE Universities in Malaysia, and also OVERSEAS..So why was he even charged for this?
Should this SECTION 505 offence be AMENDED...
- It is OK to have an offence for persons who makes, publishes or circulates any statement, rumour or report that is FALSE and he/so does so despite knowing that it is FALSE... either way, the Government must investigate first, whether it was FALSE first > it is wrong for the Government to not even do that > and expect the SUSPECT(now accused person) to prove it was true - will the government then provide the suspect ALL relevant data - including on all University Students so one can determine whether said student truly qualified to enter, and that there were NO students more qualified denied University Entrance..The accused will also need details of students that should not be in UNIVERSITY as he/she had lesser qualifications that required compared to students denied entrance...Then the accussed must INVESTIGATE whether monies were paid and received - that got these 'unqualified' students places in Malaysian Public Universities > will the government, relevant Ministries, law enforcement provide these information to the ACCUSED so he can prove that all is said was NOT FALSE > Honestly, the Government should have INVESTIGATED first professionally first ...and then only consider charging Haim...
- the 2nd element of the offence is also 'wrong' as it relates to consequence or effect on people '...with intent to cause, or which his likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public...' - well, we had the IMDB scandal, when first raised was denied and only later proven to be true...and the consequence would have been likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public. YES, any highlighting of alleged or suspected wrongdoing will have the same effect > so, is it right to CHARGE one who raised it with a Section 505 offence > or should not the authorities first investigate the allegations - and inform the public of its findings. But will the government be honest - we remember the first reaction of State for so long as Najib and BN was in power until GE14 ...
From the explanation of Section 505 offence itself...
Did the Prosecution first investigate and determine whether when the person making, publishing or circulating any such statement, rumour or report has reasonable grounds for believing that such statement, rumour or report is true - if Haim Hilman had reasonable grounds for believing that such statement, rumour or report is true > Then Haim HILMAN should not be CHARGED
Did the Prosecution first investigate and determine whether the person '...makes, publishes or circulates it without any such intent as aforesaid fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public where by any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquillity?
Will any person be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquillity? Yes - should not the Prosecution determined whether any one will commit such 'offences' - WELL, in Malaysia, people follow the law - they may speak up, protest or hold peaceful assemblies > so, the possibly of people hearing Haim Hilman will break the law is really not probable? Also what offence against the State? And what offence against public tranquility? Some examples would be good. NOW, if what Haim said will cause voters to withdraw support to the PH-BN Madani government parties is NOT an offence - that is just part of our practice of democracy... It is ABSURD to even suggest that no one can highlight wrongs of government and thus reduce public support for the government parties > then we might as well abolish the 'OPPOSITION' and even backbenchers in Parliament ..for that is what they do 'check and balance of government of the day' - and naturally wooing support of VOTERS for the next elections.
2nd - Did Haim even HAVE ANY INTENT for people to commit such crimes (offence against the State or against the public tranquillity) - in my opinion, this should have determined first
REMEMBER in Malaysia, under current law, the PROSECUTION cannot charge anyone in Court UNTIL it has done needed investigation and determined that it has sufficient evidence to convince the COURT that they have a PRIMA FACIE case against Haim Hilman > if they did not conduct a complete investigation and verily believed that they have the needed evidence - they cannot charge Haim Hilman > it would be an ABUSE OF POWER...
So, DID Haim make the statements with INTENT, or was likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public - WELL that, in my opinion, is not enough for Prosecution to CHARGE. The emotions only is NOT enough - what we need is MORE - that is any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquillity. Whether HAIM intended this - people will commit crime?
In short, I believe that the charging of Haim Hilman may be premature - or worse, an ABUSE OF POWER?
WONDER whether this is a SLAPP action?
It is also interesting to NOTE that HAIM HILMAN could have said the same thing in the State Legislative Assembly or PARLIAMENT and not be facing any charges - because of Parliamentary privilege?
ANTI-SLAPP
laws if government wants people to highlight alleged
wrongdoings/crimes, etc - Investigate alleged crimes highlighted >
and do not target whistle-blowers, brave one who highlight wrongs of the
powerful,...??
Parliamentary privilege is a set of legal immunities and rights granted to members of a legislature (such as Members of Parliament or Senators) and the institution itself. It allows them to perform their constitutional duties without interference, legal liability, or intimidation.
The issue that Haim HILMAN is University admissions and possible ABUSE - Investigate this and the MINISTER must report to the public?
The allegations is just like the 'Corporate MAFIA' and also possible involvement of some MACC officers...
These kind of HIGHLIGHTED issues - the GOVERNMENT cannot avoid to answer OR refocus attention by charging them that HIGHLIGHT it??
INDEPENDENCE of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR - we do not want a prosecution that can be abused by any INCUMBENT Government..
SOMETHING that all Malaysians must think about...
Kedah exco Haim Hilman claims trial over PAS ceramah statement on university admissions
KUALA LUMPUR, June 25 — Kedah state executive councillor Haim Hilman Abdullah pleaded not guilty today to a charge of making a statement during a PAS ceramah that could potentially cause public fear or alarm, according to The Star.
The Jitra assemblyman claimed trial after the charge was read out before Magistrate Nurul Saqinah Rosli at the Magistrate’s Court here today.
Haim Hilman, who is the state Industry and Investment, Higher Education, Science, Technology and Innovation committee chairman, was charged with making the statement between 8pm and midnight on June 13 at Markas PAS Seremban along Jalan Jelebu.
According to the report, he was charged under Section 505(b) of the Penal Code, which provides for a maximum jail term of two years, a fine, or both upon conviction.
The charge relates to remarks he allegedly made claiming that public universities were selling admission places to wealthy individuals.
He also allegedly claimed that students seeking admission to the institutions could only enter through the “back door”.
Haim Hilman was also accused of claiming that deserving students who performed well in SPM, STPM, matriculation and Asasi programmes were denied places in competitive and critical courses because such places were being sold.
He further alleged that the government had not provided sufficient funding or places at the universities.
State prosecution chief Ku Hayati Ku Haron offered bail of RM10,000 pending the next mention and requested that Haim Hilman surrender his passport to the court.
However, defence counsel Mohd Faizi Che Abu sought a lower bail of RM5,000 and objected to the passport surrender request.
He added that his client had voluntarily attended court to clear his name and urged the court to impose a reasonable bail.
Magistrate Nurul Saqinah then set bail at RM5,000 with one surety and fixed July 30 for the next mention, The Star reported. - Malay Mail, 25/6/2026
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment