Sedition Act: Sessions Court grants Azmi Sharom’s application

9
193

The Sessions Court has granted Azmi Sharom’s application to refer the issue of whether the Sedition Act 1948 is constitutional to the High Court. Round One to Azmi Sharom!

As the sedition crackdown continues, many will be watching this application closely in the hope that this draconian act will be finally repealed, as Najib had pledged.

Please help to support this blog if you can.

Read the commenting guidlelines for this blog.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

9 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Supercally

It’s one thing to fight for democracy and rights. It’s something else to challenge law and order in the name of it. At this point, those who persist in making seditious callous unwarranted comments that could cause disharmony and friction are in danger of losing sight of their aims.

lazlo

“The Malaysian government has increasingly employed the Sedition Act, a British colonial era law, to intimidate and silence political opponents. The law criminalises speech uttered ‘to excite disaffection’ against the government and defines sedition so broadly that it is an invitation to authoritarian abuse,” said the New York Times’s editorial.

Yang

The govt is right in not repealing the Sedition Act as demonstrated by the many abuses made by these opposition. There are limits to the exceptions granted to these oppositions.The benign treatment granted these opposition from Pakatan & NGOs had led some of them to think that they are the exception to the rules and rest of the people and country The BN govt had taken a pragmatic approach in giving these NGOs and the oppositions from Pakatan demonstrating its rationality, generosity and tolerance.They should not keep asking for more; they should know where the line of exceptions or limitation… Read more »

grkumar

Supercally, the court is fair when it gives a decision that the opposition considers a victory to itself. The first point to make on the courts decision is that it is a procedural matter. It is no victory to Azmi Sharom. When one critically examines clause or paragraph 4 of the Sedition Act the only thing that is contestable about it is the poor English Grammar in which it was drafted. But there is nothing special about that particular defect in that relevant clause. If Gobind Singh and Azmi consider it a “victory”, then they have more difficulties than many… Read more »

lazlo

Is it not seditious for Umno to suggest that chinese vernacular school be abolished? Over to you MCA!

charleskiwi

The final decision is with the (people) in Umno, the judges are … appointed or even have their terms of employment being extended by them. Do i need to go any further than what are being given herein ?

Supercally

Who say that the court is not fair.

lazlo

You should also add that only in Malaysia you can wear underwear on your head in court as in the case of corrupted Kastam fellows.

Supercally

lazlo ; What do I call you. blind, stupid, ignorant or simply a liar who blurt out as if you are very smart. The Kastam fellow did not wear underwear in court. Only when they were led out or led in to the court did they then put underwear to cover their face to prevent the media or people from taking photograph of their face. They will have to show their face once they are in court. Next time before making such silly comments go inside the court and see what is happening.