People’s Call for Regime Change - Part 1
17 February, 2011
By NH Chan
The People’s Judge reflects on the turmoil in the Middle East - a people’s revolution inspired by the power of the new media on the internet such as Facebook and Twitter - and the lessons for us in Malaysia. He ends with a personal note of his own political awakening, and a call to action for all of us who care for this country.
The uprising in Egypt, the uprising in Tunisia,the uprising in Yemen and even in Jordan there are rumblings in the kingdom. The message is clear. The people do not want their dictators.
And what is the difference between kings, dictators and oligarchs? They are all totalitarian regimes - this means a system of government consisting of only one leader or party and having complete power and control over the people.
But the people do not want that kind of government; they want democracy - this word means a form of government in which the people have a say in who should hold power; they do not want despotism. And this wish of the people could only mean that they want a government of the people, by the people and for the people which is what a true democracy actually is.
In other words, they do not want repressive rule in any shape or form. They want human rights. They do not want draconian and oppressive laws.
In short, they do not want to live under a perennial state of emergency because all emergency laws are only excuses for tyranny. They also want freedom of speech and a free press.
In other words they want a government which is accountable to the people. They want change from authoritarian - this word, which is an adjective, means demanding strict obedience of authority - rule.
And what is the antithesis of totalitarianism? It is democracy, which is what the people really want. In a democracy, the people can choose their own representatives in government. If the people’s choice did not perform up to their expectations they could be replaced by the people.
In a true democracy, there will be no such thing as intervention from an illegitimate source to hijack the people’s choice of representatives in their government.
0211-mubarak-puppet-egypt-cairo_full_600
The foreboding of a dictatorship
What has happened in Egypt and in the Middle East was a people’s call for regime change. The dictators there who have clung to power should have seen the writing on the wall; it was time for them to leave. The people, especially the young people because they are educated and well informed, did not want them. They have overstayed their tenure.
They became corrupted by power; there is a well known adage which says power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Any dictatorship is tyrannical - the word means ‘using power in a cruel and oppressive way’ - as was seen in Egypt under Hosni Mubarak who had clung to power for 30 years. In recent events there, we have seen water cannons and tear gas being used on peaceful protestors by the regime. Mubarak’s Gestapo like police have tortured and killed dissenters: I saw a peaceful protestor exclaim on TV "They have shot me! What am I? The enemy?"
In this country we have been governed by the Barisan Nasional (BN) for some 53 years. This country is supposed to be a democracy. But it is not. Guided democracy is nothing more than an excuse for tyranny. We still have draconian laws. People are still being incarcerated under the ISA which is detention without trial. There is police brutality which seems to be endemic in the force. The people’s fundamental freedoms have been muzzled; they have even used the Sedition Act against the country’s citizens.
Respect cannot be forced. If you are good respect comes naturally. The people do not want their legitimately elected state government to be hijacked by the autocrats. What happened in Perak and in Selangor are the clearest examples of governmental wrongdoings. So that if these autocrats are not careful, the tyrannical happenings in this country could easily turn into a catalyst for change.
But we do not want to follow the trend as played out in the Middle East. It is necessary, therefore, that we earnestly take steps to make the change from the BN regime at the next general elections by replacing it with a democratic one.
We do not want autocrats - the word means ‘rulers or persons with absolute power who expect obedience’ - to tell us with supercilious arrogance what is good for us, for that is another excuse for tyranny.
We want our rulers to be answerable to us, the people. Despots are not needed to run this country because they will always be corrupted by power - that is the reason why the Prime Minister and members of his Cabinet should not be allowed to stay in office for more than two terms. The same should apply to the Menteri Besars and the Excos.
George Orwell Animal Farm All Animals Equal
Animal Farm
If you have read Animal Farm -a novel by George Orwell, published in 1945 - you will know what I mean. The book is a satire in fable form. The pigs (whose leader is Napoleon) become corrupted by power and a new tyranny replaces the old. The ultimate slogan runs ‘All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others‘.
The BN has been with us for 53 years and on each succession of the BN government a new tyranny replaces the old. I say this because nothing has changed since the BN came to power. We have the same repressive laws. But there is now a new tyranny. The new evil is the hijacking of a legitimately elected state government in Perak and this, in my estimation, is the last straw for the people of Perak to tolerate. For the rest of the country, remember this, if it can happen in Perak it could happen again elsewhere in this country.
This was mainly the reason that made me change my mind from being apolitical to decide to vote for the underdogs because what the BN had done to Perak was wickedly unfair and unjustifiable.
NH Chan, the People's Judge
NH Chan, the People's Judge
After reading the book Perak: A State of Crisis I realized that these people do not even know right from wrong. They even gloat in their wrongdoings. We do not want the oligarchy - this word means a country governed by a small group of people - to be more equal than us.
I don’t have to tell you who they are - even in the BN some ‘animals’ are more equal than others. Look at their opulence.
It is a good thing if every member of the Cabinet and every member of the Exco are investigated as to their financial status and assets before they can assume office. And when they leave office they are to be investigated again. They are to be accountable if they are found to be richer than what they could have earned while in office when they leave.
That is why democracy requires the representatives of the people to be accountable to the people. Look atMr Lim Kit Siang, he has been in politics for as long as I can remember andhis son is currently the Chief Minister of Penang. Another was the lateDr Lim Chong Eu. The Perakians and the Penangites know that they are not rich.
One should be in politics to serve the people, not to get rich.
Part 2 will be published tomorrow.
NH Chan, a much respected former Court of Appeal Judge, is a gavel of justice that has no hesitation in pounding on Federal Court judges with wooden desks for heads. Retired from the Judiciary to become the People?s Judge. Wrote the explosive "Judging The Judges", now in its 2nd edition as "How To Judge The Judges". Once famously hinted at a possible "case match" between lawyer and judge by remarking that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (see Ayer Molek Rubber Company Berhad & Ors v Insas Berhad & Anor [1995] 3 CLJ 359). We need more people like NH Chan. That?s why you should buy PASOC and his book.
* Share/Save
Tags: Barisan Nasional, Democracy, Dictatorship, Egypt Revolution, Hosni Mubarak, Jordan, Lim Chong Eu, Lim Guan Eng, Lim Kit Siang, N.H. Chan, Oligarychy, PASOC, rich politicians, Totalitarianism, Tunisia uprising, Yemen uprising
This entry was posted at loyarburok.com on 17 February, 2011 at 8:00 am
***************************************************
People’s Call for Regime Change - Part 2
18 February, 2011
By NH Chan
Photo Credit: Wan Eijas
Photo Credit: Wan Eijas
The People’s Judge continues his call to the young to use the tools of modern communication to effect change in Malaysia, pointing out how we are stuck with a government using 19th century British colonial laws to further repress us. Read Part 1 of this article here.
The Sedition Act as applied in this country
The sedition legislation is the most oppressive law ever devised by a colonial power to subjugate the natives by the colonialists who took over the land they had colonized. In this country the Sedition Act 1948 is typical of such colonialism - this word means ‘the practice of acquiring and controlling another country and occupying it’. If you read on you will know that this is the true picture of how our Sedition Act 1948 migrated from 1870 British India to Peninsular Malaya in 1948 when the country was a British protectorate except for Malacca and Penang which were colonies.
There is an excellent article in the Star, Wednesday, 9 February 2011, titled Sedition law’s overreach by Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi. It says:
Definition: Section 2 and 3(1) of the [Sedition Act 1948] state that any act, speech, words or publication are seditious if they have a tendency towards any of the following:
To bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or government.
Dissaffection does not mean absence of affection but refers to disloyalty, enmity and hostility: PP v Param Cumaraswamy [1986] 1 MLJ 526
Application of the law: In Param Cumaraswamy it was held that intention to incite to violence, tumult or public disorder is not a necessary ingredient of the crime.
As long as the words were intentionally published and they had a tendency to cause ill will, etc, the offence is complete.
The Professor also alluded to the acquittal of Mr Cumaraswamy:
But in PP v Param the defendant’s criticism of the Pardon’s Board for not applying uniform standards in considering applications for mercy was held not to constitute sedition.
I was the judge who tried Mr Param Cumaraswamy. At the conclusion of the trial, I acquitted him.
As pointed out by Professor Faruqi ‘As long as the words were intentionally published and they had a tendency to cause ill will, etc, the offence is’ established. I had to acquit Param Cumaraswamy because I made a finding of fact that the words when uttered by him, who is a mere lawyer without any following, could not possibly have any tendency ‘to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or government’. The Public Prosecutor, who in this case was the Attorney-General - he was Abu Talib - did not appeal.
Source: Malaysiakini
Source: Malaysiakini
Just think how repressive this law is. You can’t even say that the powers that be were practicing double standards. If Param had been tried before another judge he could have been convicted. For example, in Lim Guan Eng v PP [1998] 3 MLJ 14, HC & CA; [2000] 2 MLJ 577, FC an opposition leader who complained that justice was selectively administered was convicted of the sedition charge. Even members of Parliament can be convicted of sedition for words spoken in Parliament: see Mark Koding v PP [1982] 2 MLJ 120.
Mahathir when he was Prime Minister spoke in Parliament to remove the powers of the rulers yet nothing happened to him. But if anyone were to point out there is selective prosecution he can be charged for sedition and most probably he would be convicted.
At the end of his article, the Professor pointed out that:
The concept of sedition in Malaysia is much broader than in the UK, Ireland, India and Australia.
On ideal democratic standards, the law is open to many criticisms for its breadth and for its far-reaching implications on political life in the country.
For this reason it is ripe for review. Whether the technique for law reform will be legislative or judicial remains to be seen.
We are stuck in the 19th century
Source: Wikipedia | Alexander Bassano
Source: Wikipedia | Alexander Bassano
The professor is quite right. The Sedition Act 1948 is an archaic piece of legislation. It migrated from 1870 British India to Peninsular Malaya in 1948 (Sabah in 1964 and Sarawak in 1969). While other countries of the Commonwealth, of which Malaysia is a member, have advanced into the modern age, in this country, time stood still. We are still back in the time of Sir James Stephen in 1870 British India. This was pointed out by Sinha CJ in Kader Nath v State of Bihar [1962] AIR, SC 955. In fact section 124A of the Indian Penal Code was the work of Stephen J.
Sir James Stephen was the judge (he was Mr Justice Stephen in England) whose definition of sedition appeared as Article 93 of the Digest of the Criminal Law. I said this before I called on Mr Cumaraswamy to enter on his defence, "Although it may appear to be in English case law that incitement to violence or inciting others to public disorders is an essential ingredient of sedition, it is not so in a criminal code which has as its model Stephen’s definition."
Article 93 of the Digest was used as the model for the crime of sedition in the Criminal Code of the Gold Coast.
So that when we look at section 124A of the Indian Penal Code or at the Criminal Code of the Gold Coast on Sedition, or our own Sedition Act, we are looking at the definition of sedition as apprehended by Sir James Stephen back in the year 1870. The English common law on sedition has developed separately from Stephen’s 1870 definition. As pointed out by Professor Faruqi other nations like the UK, Ireland, India and Australia have moved on to modern times. The modern law of sedition is no longer repressive in other countries but not so in Malaysia where our sedition law is the same law as applied to the colonies of Great Britain back in the year 1870. For us Malaysians we live in a retrograde - this word means moving backwards to a worse state - country where our clock had stopped in the year 1870.
DN BN People's Parliament
Using the ability of the internet for change
Now, I trust you will realize that we Malaysians are in dire straits. Don’t you think it is time for us to move on to a better Malaysia. Like the people of Egypt we can use people’s power to change from tyranny to a true democracy. Use the power of your vote to unseat the oppressors.
We have been under their yoke for 53 years.Enough is enough!
Use facebook and twitter. Use your email and if every reader of this article emails it to his friends we will be able to persuade a whole generation of young people to vote out the BN and replace them with a new government.
It doesn’t matter that the new are inexperienced but at least we have a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It took the English peoples 700 years to get rid of their tyrannical kings. The American people took 250 years to get to where they are today.
I don’t think we will take that long because we are resilient and we have the benefit of hindsight. And above all we have our young people whose young minds will be able to meet the challenges ahead.
Read also:
* Sedition under the law of this country
* Sedition held unconstitutional
* LoyarBorak #1: Is Twitter Useless at Social Activism - Part 1 and Part 2
NH Chan, a much respected former Court of Appeal Judge, is a gavel of justice that has no hesitation in pounding on Federal Court judges with wooden desks for heads. Retired from the Judiciary to become the People’s Judge. Wrote the explosive "Judging The Judges", now in its 2nd edition as "How To Judge The Judges". Once famously hinted at a possible "case match" between lawyer and judge by remarking that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (see Ayer Molek Rubber Company Berhad & Ors v Insas Berhad & Anor [1995] 3 CLJ 359). We need more people like NH Chan. That’s why you should buy PASOC and his book.
* Share/Save
Tags: Abu Talib, Barisan Nasional, Democracy, Dictatorship, Egypt Revolution, Hosni Mubarak, Jordan, Lim Chong Eu, Lim Guan Eng, Lim Kit Siang, N.H. Chan, NH Chan, Oligarychy, Param Cumaraswamy, Pardons Board, PASOC, rich politicians, sedition, Shad Faruqi, social media, social revolution, Totalitarianism, Tunisia uprising, Yemen uprising
This entry was posted at loyarburok.com on 18 February, 2011 at 8:00 am
No comments:
Post a Comment