REMEMBER the LAW is clear in that the Prosecution cannot simply charge anyone in court as it pleases, the Prosecution is DUTY BOUND to only charge anyone when he/she has sufficient evidence to prove a prima facie case, or is confident that they can prove guilt beyond any reasonable doubt. The Public Prosecutor CANNOT charge and then investigate.
The principle is that a person should not be charged in Court until the investigation into the case against him has been completed and there is prima facie evidence to prosecute him of the charge. In other words, a person should not be put in peril of a criminal trial unless the prosecution is able to prove the case against him. To do otherwise is an injustice. It is unjust because of the social stigma that immediately attaches to a person once he is charged in Court. He is deserted by his friends. His business is affected. His creditors close on him. His family is ashamed. He is mentally tormented awaiting trial.
And last but not least, he has to incur the expense of engaging Counsel. There is no consolation in the fact that he may eventually be shown to be innocent of the charge. The damage has been done.
To prosecute a person in Court on a criminal charge, therefore is a grave responsibility. - Harun J, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v. TAN KIM SAN[1980] 1 LNS 66, [1980] CLJU 66; [1980] 1 LNS 66; [1980] 2 MLJ 98; [1980] 1 MLRH 450 >> For full judgement, see The legal principle as to when one should be CHARGED, Arrested and released on Police Bail - The Case of PP v Tan Kim San, judgement of late Supreme Court Judge Harun Mahmud Hashim
So, Sanusi should commence legal action, and give the Court the opportunity to HIGHLIGHT the wrongdoings of the Public Prosecutor - and reaffirm the law governing prosecution, when can anyone be charged?
NOTE that in Malaysia, and in most jurisdictions, we are very careful when in comes to criminal charges - The standard of PROOF is very high - BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT, which means that even is there is a slightest reasonable doubt, the accused will not be convicted. This means that many CRIMINALS are walking free simply because the Prosecution had failed to prove the accussed is guilty on this very HIGH STANDARD - why this? “the law holds that it is better that 10 guilty persons escape, than that 1 innocent suffer (innocent person be convicted).” - doctrine ascribed in 1769 by William Blackstone.
So, when Sanusi was charged did the Public Prosecutor verily believe that he had sufficient evidence to PROVE GUILT beyond reasonable doubt, or at the least a PRIMA FACIE case at the close of prosecutions case - IF NOT, this is a GROSS abuse of power...
If the charging of Sanusi was because of some order/instruction by the PM and/or government, it is WORSE.
If the charging of Sanusi was because of a POLITICAL PURPOSE' - then it is very wrong.
When it comes to CRIMES, which is a violation of LAW of the Land, enacted by the people, - the fact that the Victim is no longer interested is IRRELEVANT - even if the Sultans, in this case the Sultan of Selangor and the Sultan of Pahang does not want the case to proceed, it is IRRELEVANT - for all that matters is whether the LAW has been violated, and the accussed committed the crime of SEDITION. Even if the PM Anwar and the government is of the opinion that the case should not be proceeded with, it is IRRELEVANT - the prosecution is duty bound to continue and prove that the accussed committed the crime.
So, an apology to the SULTAN or King will not, and ought not affect criminal trials from continuing until the very end.
The Kedah MB apologised to Sultan Sharafuddin earlier this year, which the Sultan accepted in the spirit of Islamic brotherhood.What were the 2 charges are UNCLEAR as the exact wordings of the charge seem to have not been reported by media.
Sanusi’s remarks, made in a political speech earlier this month, questioned decisions taken by the Malaysian royalty regarding the formation of government at the federal and state level, according to other media reports.
Nothing wrong with such comments like the King wrongly appointed the wrong person as Prime Minister, despite the fact that another had relevant support of majority at the time. IN fact, it may also not be a SEDITION OFFENCE - if it was to show that any Ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures;..
Anyone can criticize a Prime Minister or a State Chief Minister, despite the fact that he/she is appointed by King or Sultan.
In Malaysia, the fact that someone is appointed by King and/or State Ruler does not mean that to criticize such appointee is a 'sedition' offence against king or Ruler - for so many are appointed by King/Rulers.
In fact, it may be disloyalty to King/Ruler if we do not highlight such inadequacies or CRIMES of appointed persons. Judges are appointed by King, and it is absurd to even suggest 'sedition against King' when we criticize said Judge, Attorney General, Minister, etc...
The ONLY reason for discontinuance of a criminal prosecution should be things like (a) Loss of material evidence relied on that led to the belief that prosecution had enough to prove Prima Facie case, or Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt - same document/material evidence got lost/stolen, some witness, once believed to be credible, was not determined by prosecution to be no longer credible or had lied, some material witness disappeared, some material witness 'changed' his/her testimony, TRUTH came to light that the perpetrator was some other not the accused, ... so, the question is why did the Prosecution decide to discontinue criminal prosecution in Sanusi's case?
The apology and the acceptance of the apology by the King/Sultan cannot be the reason, Anwar does not want the case to proceed is also not a good reason, Prosecutor decided to be 'merciful' - also cannot because mercy comes into play during pardon process that comes after trial, conviction and sentence, so WHAT was the reason? If no good and legally acceptable reason, then it indicates the likelihood of 'Abuse of Power' by the Public Prosecutor.
If the government of the day, imposes a MORATORIUM on Sedition cases pending review and repeal, then it is different, if the MORATORIUM is law...if it is only 'talk', then it is irrelevant, I believe - I am of the opinion, even a MORATORIUM need to enacted law, not simply a 'promise' or a policy decision. Have all SEDITION cases been discontinued? Have the government stopped using Sedition law? No, I do not think - so, is this 'SELECTIVE' decision to discontinue the case.
REMEMBER, 'selective prosecution' only means the non-prosecution of others who committed the same crime - Why only me? It is NOT a defense to the crime one is accused of committing - the case will proceed, and the Courts after trial will decide whether prosecution has managed to prove the crime alleged beyond reasonable doubt. If yes, then conviction and sentence.
When it comes to sentence, the views or position or 'forgiveness' of the victims are matters that the Courts will consider when sentencing. In this case, if the said Rulers affected tell the Court that they do not desire a heavy sentence, or require an apology - the court will consider when imposing the sentence .. but conviction remains, but the sentence could be minor. COURTS decide on guilt and sentence.
Interestingly, in Sanusi's case, if the criminal trial proceeded to the end, the Judges may have likely decided that Sanusi was NOT GUILTY - and thus all Malaysians will know that such comments are NOT SEDITION CRIMES - that would have been good.
PM Anwar and his PH-led government have been DISHONEST - they said that only 3R cases will be investigated/prosecuted under Sedition Act - and one is free to criticize the PM and the government, but the fact that they are not yet putting into effect the provisions of the Sedition(Amendment) Act of 2015 that has already been passed by Parliament is most PUZZLING..
Section 3 Seditious tendency - SEDITION ACT 1948
(1) A "seditious tendency" is a tendency -
(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government;...(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;
(2) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (1) an act, speech, words, publication or other thing shall not be deemed to be seditious by reason only that it has a tendency-
(a) to show that any Ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures;
There is the SEDITION(Amendment) Act 2015 - where the Minister can put into force Section 3 or part of Section 3 - that makes it OK to criticize the Government and the administration of justice. This will be EXACTLY what Anwar Ibrahim has been saying - OK to criticize government, and that Sedition Act will only be used for 3R(Race/Religion/Royalty) - so, is it not 'LIES' or 'Hypocrisy' when he or his Minister does not put into force the relevant sections that will make this TRUE
SEDITION (AMENDMENT) ACT 2015
Royal Assent: 28 May 2015 In Force from: Not Yet In Force Gazetted Date: 4 June 2015
3 Amendment of section 3Section 3 of the principal Act is amended—
(a) in subsection (1)—
(i) in paragraph (a), by deleting the words “or against any Government”;
(ii) by deleting paragraph (c);
Is the SEDITION ACT being used for critics of government - not just 3R issues?
a) When lawyer, Rafique Rashid, who allegedly criticized Anwar Ibrahim for not keeping his election promises was summoned by Dang Wangi police over a speech he gave at an opposition rally in Perak in July under the Sedition Act; ‘…lawyer Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali said he was earlier questioned under the Sedition Act 1948 for the content of his speech delivered during a June anti-government rally held outside the prime minister’s official residence in Putrajaya.’ (Malaysiakini,22/7/2024) and
b) When Sabahan activist Mukmin Nantang was released on police bail after being briefly arrested under the Sedition Act. “An Inspector Roslan told me he was being ordered to arrest me under the Sedition Act, allegedly for a TikTok video on the Bajau Laut incident,” he [Mukmin] told Malay Mail when contacted.(Malay Mail, 27/6/2024) It was allegedly a video showing the destruction of Bajau Laut homes by authorities, his lawyer Nurul Rafeeqa said.
I HOPE THAT SANUSI WOULD TAKE LEGAL ACTION - allowing the Court also to end Abuse of Power by Public Prosecutor, and remind them the duties of an INDEPENDENT Public Prosecutor - in terms of charging people in court, discontinuing criminal trials mid-stream, withdrawing of appeals in criminal cases > an opportunity for Court to reiterate the LEGAL Principles that the Public Prosecutor must follow to ensure that JUSTICE be done, and Public Prosecutor's powers are never again be abused ..
MOST disappointing if Kedah Menteri Besar Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor chooses not to act when he now is bestowed with this GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY. Then, we may wonder whether this is because of worry that the Federal Government will block/reduce Federal allocations to the State, etc --- I hope he commence a court action despite any 'THREAT' as this is a most important issue..that will benefit all Malaysians...
see also:-
Malaysian Bar Resolution against the Sedition Act, other laws and actions taken which stifle speech and expression, and matters in connection therewith
Malaysia’s decision not to repeal Sedition Act UNACCEPTABLE – Put in Force Section 3(a)(i) and (ii) Sedition (Amendment) Act 2015, that already received the King’s Assent on 28/5/2015, which is consistent with present government position.
SEDITION ACT - Repeal it. Reveal the wordings of Charge? Did reformist DAP, PKR and Amanah do a U-turn on their position?
SEDITION Act - Moratorium on the use of unjust laws pending repeal
Kedah MB Sanusi clears sedition charge over remarks on Selangor Sultan
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 10 — Kedah Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor was acquitted by the High Court in Shah Alam today in his sedition case from comments on the Selangor Sultan, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah.
According to Sinar Harian, Judge Datuk Aslam Zainuddin freed Sanusi, 50, after the prosecution informed the court that it did not intend to pursue the case further.
“The court orders that Sanusi be acquitted and discharged from one sedition charge against the Sultan of Selangor, while the other case against the Agong is set for trial,” Aslam was quoted as saying.
Earlier, Deputy Public Prosecutor Datuk Masri Mohd Daud had requested for a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) for the first case.
Sanusi’s lawyer, Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud, objected, arguing for a full discharge to provide his client with final resolution under the law.
Sanusi previously claimed trial to both sedition charges, and sought to resolve them through representation to the Attorney General’s Chambers.
The Kedah MB apologised to Sultan Sharafuddin earlier this year, which the Sultan accepted in the spirit of Islamic brotherhood.
Sanusi, a prominent leader in the Perikatan Nasional opposition coalition, faces a maximum penalty of RM5,000 or three years' imprisonment if convicted of the remaining charge under the Sedition Act.
Court frees Sanusi of sedition charge after AGC drops case over Kedah MB’s remarks on Agong
KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 24 — The High Court in Shah Alam today acquitted Kedah Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor of making seditious remarks against the 16th Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah.
According to Free Malaysia Today, Justice Aslam Zainuddin granted the acquittal after the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) accepted Sanusi’s representations and decided not to pursue the case.
Although the prosecution initially sought a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA), the judge ruled for a full acquittal based on the defence’s argument.
Sanusi’s lawyer, Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud, argued that since the prosecution no longer intended to proceed, an acquittal was the fair outcome.
The ruling means Sanusi is now cleared of all sedition charges related to his remarks about the monarchy made during a political speech in Gombak on July 11, 2023.
Previously, on Dec 10, he was also acquitted of a separate charge involving the Sultan of Selangor after issuing an apology to the state Ruler.
Sanusi had faced charges under the Sedition Act 1948, which carries penalties of up to RM5,000 in fines, three years’ imprisonment, or both. - Malay Mail, 24/2/2025
Malaysia charges politician with sedition over sultan remarks
Opposition politician pleads not guilty, accuses government of stifling free speech as regional elections loom.
Prosecutors in Malaysia have charged an opposition leader with two counts of sedition for insulting the country’s revered sultans, according to media reports.
Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor, a popular politician with the conservative Islamic party, PAS, appeared in court to face the charges on Tuesday.
He pleaded not guilty, according to Malaysia’s official Bernama news agency.
Sanusi’s remarks, made in a political speech earlier this month, questioned decisions taken by the Malaysian royalty regarding the formation of government at the federal and state level, according to other media reports.
Following his court appearance, Sanusi, who is also the chief minister of Kedah state, accused the government of stifling free speech.
“It seems that in Malaysia, we can’t say anything,” he was quoted as saying.
“In Malaysia, we have a fearful government that uses the police to arrest and suppress our freedom of speech, with all public agencies being used to impede the development and wellbeing of the people. I am confident that with these charges, many Malaysians [now] realise their [government’s] real intentions,” he said. Al Jazeera, 18/7/2023
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment