Ban of bad faith: Hisham has to tell why Perkasa, Umno Youth spared

Before we all go nuts over the ban issued by the Home Minister, Hishamuddin Hussein Onn, we first need to remove all emotional sentiments and look at the matter in a logical and rational manner, lest we too act like any other warp-minded lunatic.

On the 1st of July, Hishamuddin issued a gazetted order citing Subsection 5(1) of the Societies Act 1966. This document can be found on the Attorney General’s website.

The ban order is a simply-worded document which merely states the following as the reason for the ban: “Whereas I am of the opinion and being satisfied that the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (BERSIH) movement is being used for purposes prejudicial to the interest of the security of Malaysia and public order”.

Hishamuddin then goes on to exercise his power to issue a ban order: “Now therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by subsection 5(1) of the Societies Act 1966 [Act 355], I hereby declare that the said Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (BERSIH) movement is an unlawful society”.

Read the above order against subsection 5(1) of the Societies Act 1966 - “5. (1) It shall be lawful for the Minister in his absolute discretion by order to declare unlawful any society or branch or class or description of any societies which in his opinion, is or is being used for purposes prejudicial to or incompatible with the interest of the security of Malaysia or any part thereof, public order or morality”.

Bad faith

Thus, the reason for any society to be banned rests solely in the mind of the minister of the time, in this case Hishamuddin Hussein Onn. The Societies Act 1996, does not spell out what are the conditions that may deem a society illegal. So the whole matter rests on the shoulders of the minister who can come up with any reason what-so-ever to ban a society.

Can Hishamuddin guarantee the Malaysian public, that he acted without bias, bad faith and with a clear mind when deciding to ban Bersih? Can Hishamuddin state that he did this without prejudice or without prior motives?

If it was this simple to ban Bersih, why wasn't Perkasa also banned? What about UMNO Youth? Did they not, due to their statements and activities these past few weeks, also acted in a way “prejudicial to or incompatible with the interest of the security of Malaysia or any part thereof, public order or morality”?

Hishamuddin has shown himself as being biased in labelling Bersih as illegal the moment it was announced the march would be held on the 9th of July. By not banning the other rally organisers, Hishamuddin as Home Minister, clearly shows he not only supports these groups but even went to great lengths to protect and shield these bodies from being prosecuted by the laws of Malaysia.

Hishamuddin has also shown his incompetence as a lawyer, by issuing orders that cannot be backed up by any gazetted laws - the ban on Bersih t-shirts. So, why should Malaysians trust Hishamuddin was acting in the best interest of the country when he banned Bersih?

Ban can be challenged

And this is why we should speak out against this ban by the Home Minister. It is a clear abuse-of-power by a minister acting on party orders. Hishamuddin is out to protect UMNO interests by disqualifying Bersih.

It is a systematic attack to discredit without evidence nor solid reasoning a civil movement and to misled the Malaysian public into believing that a movement for clean and fair elections is an evil thing.

And Hishamuddin may have fumbled once again in his own reading of the law. Nowhere in the Societies Act 1966 does it mention the term “coalition”. By Hishamuddin’s own words as stated in the ban order, Bersih is addressed as a coalition.

So is a “coalition” the same as a “society”?

You see, Bersih is a coalition of 62 NGOs - does this mean that the Registrar of Societies would now ban the 62 NGOs separately?

Such is the level of intelligence of Home Minister Hishamuddin Hussein. His supporters will say this is not fair and that he had no choice. But it is a sad when a man of education gives up what he has learnt - just to toe the party line. It only shows he has subverted his own brain and soul to others.

Can we really trust a person like this to make a sound and reasonable decision when executing his power in banning any society?