A test of Zahid’s resolve

If the Sedition Act is truly going to be used fairly, we need to see it now.

COMMENT

Even as we speak, controversial protestor and brother to the IGP Abdullah Abu Bakar walks among us after throwing the country into a frenzy over his actions last weekend. We are, of course, referring to a 50-strong protest held against a small 15-person church over a cross hanging outside, which the church had already agreed to remove.

Abdullah was reportedly questioned by the police for three hours over his involvement in the protest, though no charges have been pressed as of this time. This may not be the case for long, given that Prime Minister Najib Razak and Home Minister Zahid Hamidi have said that the protestors had to be investigated to see if they had broken any laws, sedition included. And Law Minister Nancy Shukri has cited the cross incident as an example of how the Sedition Act could protect and preserve multi-racial harmony in Malaysia.

Of course, the IGP disagrees, arguing that his brother was protesting against the cross the church displayed and not the religion of Christianity, and no one was hurt in the protest. Blood cannot judge blood, and in the interest of police neutrality, the IGP cannot get involved in this case.

But this is the first true test of the government’s promise to use the Sedition Act fairly against those who flame racial or religious tension in Malaysia, and the protestors, Abdullah included, have certainly provoked a lot of controversial discussion online about the nature of our multi-cultural and multi-religious society. Many Malaysians, including Muslims, have found the protest appalling, and are hoping against hope that those involved will get their comeuppance to the full extent of the law.

Countless opposition figures and civil society members have been recently investigated for sedition, and even Twitter users have not been safe from the all-seeing eye of the law. This has naturally led to complaints that the law is not being used fairly when you have figures from the ruling government stirring up racial sentiments and refusing to apologise going scot free. And thus far, the criticism has been fair.

If the government wants to reassure the people that it indeed has our bests interests in mind when enforcing the act, then those who stirred up so much tension between the races of Malaysia must be investigated for sedition. Failure to do so will simply lend validity to the criticism that the Sedition Act is being used solely to silence dissent.

And given the haste in which some civil society members and opposition politicians are investigated and charged with sedition, that criticism still stands unless the government can show us that no one is indeed outside the reach of the law.

The burden now rests on the shoulders of the Home Minister. With the IGP unable to conduct the investigation in the name of impartiality, Zahid must take the reins and show that his strongman image applies to anyone who would drive a wedge between Malaysians for his own ends. If not, the government will prove us all to be right, and what a shame that would be.