Call on Attorney-General Gani Patail to explain why he has not advised the police to stop abuse of  powers and violation of  human rights by ending  all  police harassment and criminalisation of  of DAP’s “No to 929” People’s Awareness campaign

(Petaling Jaya, Friday): This morning, together with five other DAP leaders and officials arrested by the police at Pandamaran, Klang on August 25 in connection with the “No to 929” campaign, and the six bailors, I went to the Klang Magistrate’s Court at 8.30 a.m. sharp, as required by the RM1,000 police bond imposed on us after our arrests. 

I checked with the court registry, spoke to the most senior magistrate and finally asked the police prosecution unit based at the court – but nobody knew about our cases. After more than half an hour, we were asked to wait until the police get further instructions as to what to do with us, as they had received no directive to charge us, although we were all arrested under Section 4 of the Sedition Act 1948. 

We decided however that as the six arrested had fulfilled our RM1,000 police bond to report at the Klang magistrate’s court at 8.30 a.m. this morning, and as the police did not know what to do with us, the arrests effected on us on August 25 were  no more in force and “freed” ourselves and released our six bailors, and that if the police wanted to pursue the matter, they could re-arrest us. 

We deplored the irresponsible police action at  a media conference at the Klang magistrates court, as making a fool of themselves, the six DAP leaders arrested, the six bailors and the Malaysian public. 

This is the third time I had been arrested under the Sedition Act in connection with the “No to 929” People's Awareness Campaign, and the fifth time the police had launched police arrest actions against DAP activists since the start of the campaign four months ago in early May. 

The police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers have had ample time to decide whether the “No to 911, No to 929, Yes to 1957” People’s Awareness Campaign, the campaign pamphlets, posters and the “No to 929” book are seditious and an offence under Section 4 of the Sedition Act.

The  Attorney-General Datuk Gani Patail should  explain why he has not advised the police to stop abuse of  powers and violation of  human rights by ending  all  police harassment and criminalisation of  of DAP’s “No to 929” People’s Awareness campaign, as Section 5 of the Sedition Act is very specific that no person shall be prosecuted for an offence under Section 4 of the Sedition Act without the written consent of the Public Prosecutor, and the matter had been first referred to the Attorney-General’s Chamber immediately after my first arrest on June 5 by the Ipoh Police. 

It is totally inconceivable and unthinkable that the ‘No to 929”  campaign could be seditious and an offence under the Sedition Act or Malaysia would have a seditious Constitution, three seditious Prime Ministers and a seditious judiciary. 

This is because the “No to 929” campaign is to defend and uphold the 1957 Merdeka Constitution, the social contract and the 1963 Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a democratic, secular and multi-religious nation with Islam as the official religion but Malaysia is not an Islamic state, whether UMNO Islamic State or PAS Islamic State. 

This is a fundamental constitutional position which had been declared by the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn and upheld by the highest court of the land. 

This morning, I distributed to the reporters at the Klang Magistrates’ Court a sheaf of documents to prove that the objective of the “No to 929” campaign is patriotic and  nationalistic with  strong  constitutional and historic support, viz: 

1. Extract from the Reid Constitution Commission Report 1957, paragraph 169 on “State Religion” that Islam as the official religion “shall not imply that the State is not a secular State”. 
2. Extract from Cobbold Commission  Report 1962 on the assurance from the two Malayan members (Wong Pow Nee and Ghazalie Shafie) to the people of Sabah and Sarawak that Islam as the national religion for the Federation “in no way jeopardizes freedom of religion in the Federation, which in effect would be secular’. 
3. The Star  report of  9^th Feb. 1983, with the headline “Don’t make Malaysia An Islamic State: Tunku” on the Tunku’s speech at his 80^th birthday party, which stated: 

“Kuala Lumpur, Thurs – Malaysia should never be turned into an Islamic state, former Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman said tonight. 

“He said that Malaysia was set up as a secular State with Islam as the official religion and this was enshrined in the Constitution. 

“’The Constitution must be respected and adhered to.  There have been attempts  by some people who tried to introduce religious laws and morality laws. This cannot be allowed. 

“’The country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia must continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion, he advised UMNO. 

“The Tunku was speaking at a birthday party hosted by the Barisan Nasional at Wisma MCA here.” 

4. The Star  report of  13^th  Feb. 1983, with the headline “Hussein Says No to Islamic State Too”  on the occasion of his 61^st birthday, which stated: 

“Kuala Lumpur, Sat – Former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn has supported Tunku Abdul Rahman’s view that Malaysia should not be turned into an Islamic State. 

“Tun Hussein said today that any move of this kind was neither wise nor practical. 

“’The nation can still be functional as a secular State with Islam as its official religion,’ he said.” 

5. The Star  report of  11^th  Feb. 1983, quoting the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Musa Hitam as supporting Tunku Abdul Rahman’s call not to turn Malaysia into an Islamic State when replying to a question at a luncheon given by the Foreign Correspondents’ Association in Singapore. Asked whether the government agreed with Tunku’s statement that Malaysia cannot be an Islamic State, Musa said: “The Tunku was reminding the Government. He is an elder statesman. We respect his judgement.” 
6. The Utusan Malaysia editorial dated 10^th February 1983 under the heading “Malaysia Negara Sekular” expressing full endorsement to Tunku’s statement that Malaysia must not be turned into an Islamic state and should continue as a secular state. 

The editorial said: “Tunku serta beberapa pemimpin berikutnya telah membuktikan yang masyarakat Malaysia sebenarnya memerlukan sebuah negara secular dengan Islam sebagai agama rasmi. Dengan corak sedemikianlah negara kita mencapai kemajuan yang mengkagumkan dunia luar dan kita sendiri. 

“Nasihat Tunku ini sangat kena pada masanya kerana sejak akhir-akhir ini kita mendengar bermacam-macam keghairahan timbul di kalangan pemimpin dan rakyat yang mahu menukarkan undang-undang negara ini kepada undang-undang Islam dan menjadikan Malaysia sebagai ‘Islamic state’.” 

It must be a matter of grave national concern, which should be given priority attention in the coming meeting of Parliament, that police officers have such shallow understanding and even ignorance of the fundamental principles of the Malaysian Constitution,  the history of the 45-year nation-building and the important constitutional documents of  the country, whether the Reid Constitution Commission Report or Cobbold Commission Report. 

The Police must not be the first to forget history. 

There is an urgent need for the Attorney-General to ensure that the police understand the fundamental  principles of Malaysian Constitution and not to regard those who seek to defend and uphold the 1957 Merdeka Constitution, the social contract and the 1963 Malaysia Agreement that Islam is the official religion but Malaysia is not an Islamic state – whether ala-PAS or ala-UMNO – as having committed the  offence of sedition. 

The Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Norian Mai, should publicly apologise for the spate of police violations of human rights and wrongful arrests of DAP leaders and activists by criminalizing peaceful and legitimate political constitutional activities and issue a nation-wide directive to the police to end such police harassment and interference with the democratic process.   

(6/9/2002)