ABDUL RAHMAN WORKS OVERTIME TO PLEASE NAJIB? U.S has 'no right' to criticise govt over Sedition blitz

KUALA LUMPUR - URBAN Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Dahlan yesterday slammed the New York Times (NYT) and the United States government as a whole for double standard.

He said the US had no right to criticise Malaysia for recent arrests and charges under the Sedition Act as the world superpower had its Patriot Act.

Rahman said if the US thought Malaysia’s Sedition Act was draconian, then the Patriot Act could also be put in the same category.

“Our government is still open to criticism, as are all democracies. We know what the people want and the situation here,” he said at the Parliament lobby.

Rahman said the government had to take into account the nation’s security and it was because of this security that the people still backed Barisan Nasional.

The NYT recently ran an opinion piece criticising Malaysia for a recent spate of sedition charges.

The paper’s editorial board described the act as a law that was so vaguely defined that it was “an invitation to authoritarian abuse”.

It went on to call the recent spate of charges under the law as “deplorable” and an attack on free speech.

On a separate matter, the Residents’ Representative Committee (RRC), to be launched in December, will not take over the role and power of local authorities.

Rahman said there was a common misconception about the role of RRC.

“RRC does not have the power to collect tax, create by-laws or grant licences and permits to businesses like the local councils. The role of RRC and local council is very different,” he said.

He said the allegation by Su Keong Siong (DAP-Ipoh) during the question and answer session earlier in the day that RRC was not legal, was uncalled for.

Rahman explained that the RRC was formed to act as a body to communicate the people’s grouses to the Federal Government.

“We want the residents’ representatives to have direct contact with the Federal Government, and voice out their needs and views straight to us,” he said, adding that there was only minimum interaction between the local councils and the people.

He said the Federal Government provided most of the facilities in the districts, thus, direct interaction was essential, so that the government could act fast on the people’s needs. -NST