Your right to be wrong

Was a law passed making the flying or showing of the pre-Merdeka flag a crime? If the Malaysian Parliament has passed such a law making it a crime to fly or show the pre-Merdeka flag then the arrest of the three people earlier this week is justified according to the law. If not, then flying or showing that flag is a not a crime and it is the right of every Malaysian to express his or her opinion as long as it does not violate any laws.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

(The Malay Mail) - National laureate Datuk A. Samad Said today defended the right to fly the criticised “Sang Saka Malaya” flag as a liberty afforded to all, after the act briefly cost him his freedom yesterday.

A Merdeka Eve incident involving the pre-Independence flag led to his controversial arrest at his home shortly after midnight yesterday, but the laureate today insisted that his detention and the sedition claim levelled against him were unjust.

“Setiap orang berhak bertindak mengikut pegangannya sendiri. Soal siapa benar siapa salah adalah soal yang lain (Everyone has the right to act according to his or her belief. The question of who is right or wrong is a separate matter),” A. Samad, or Pak Samad as he is popular known as, told The Malay Mail Online in a text message.

*********************************************

That is the gist of the whole thing. Every person has a right to his or her belief. And every person has a right to express this belief. And expressing this belief can be done in many ways. You can say it or you can show it. And belief here means more than just religious beliefs. It covers anything and everything that you may believe in.

This is fundamental. This is what civil liberties is all about. And this is what is missing in Malaysia. Unfortunately, this is what Malaysian politicians do not defend -- whether they are from the ruling party or the opposition. And, unfortunately also, this is what most Malaysians do not understand and do not respect.

We cannot talk about change and fight for change unless we can first of all embrace change. But how far are Malaysians prepared to embrace change? Change requires a lot of sacrifices. And one such sacrifice, which most Malaysians apparently are not prepared to accept, is to allow the other person to express his or her opinion that may run contra to ours.

To most of us, change merely means change of government. We send the ruling party into the opposition and make the opposition the ruling government. After that then what? Will it then be business as usual or will we see a new culture emerging? Judging by the sentiments of most Malaysians it is just going to be business as usual.

Changing the government is the first step and a very small step at that. It is merely the beginning and not the end. But if we treat changing the government as the final solution, then we are very far from understanding the real meaning of change.

In some countries, wearing a Nazi Swastika armband is a crime. You can get arrested for doing that. But that is because a law has been passed making it a crime. Hence, by law, it is a crime. Can I wear a Nazi Swastika armband in Malaysia? Will I get arrested for doing that? Has a law been passed in Parliament making it a crime?

If no law has been passed by the Malaysian Parliament making the wearing of a Nazi Swastika armband a crime then I am at liberty to wear one although this will most certainly be viewed as ‘bad taste’. My wearing a Nazi Swastika armband is my right to express my belief and by law is not a crime. Hence I should not be arrested for doing so.

Was a law passed making the flying or showing of the pre-Merdeka flag a crime? If the Malaysian Parliament has passed such a law making it a crime to fly or show the pre-Merdeka flag then the arrest of the three people earlier this week is justified according to the law. If not, then flying or showing that flag is a not a crime and it is the right of every Malaysian to express his or her opinion as long as it does not violate any laws.

Sedition is a very wide law. The sedition law was first introduced hundreds of years ago in England (even before America came into being) to stifle dissent and opposition to the King. This law was based on the belief that the King is appointed by God and can do no wrong and hence to question or oppose the King means to oppose God.

Malaysia’s laws came from Britain. Hence Malaysia, too, has a sedition law. However, while Britain abolished the Sedition Act on 1st January 2010, Malaysia still applies this law to anyone who expresses his or her opinion that the government is not comfortable with, flying or showing the pre-Merdeka flag included.

When we talk about the law we need to discuss not just the letter of the law but the spirit of the law as well. And this was the reason why the Federal Court ruled my detention under the Internal Security Act in 2001 and again in 2008 as illegal or unconstitutional.

The government argued that I am a threat to national security (in the first detention) and that I have insulted Islam (in the second detention). However, was this why the government introduced the detention without trial law in 1960?

The Internal Security Act is a very specific law. The letter of the law says it is a law to be used against those who threaten Malaysia’s security. But the spirit of the law ‘says’ it is to be used against any armed terrorist group, in particular the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM).

I was not armed and neither do I belong to any terrorist group, especially not to the CPM. Hence, based on the spirit of the law, the court ruled my two detentions as illegal -- even if I may be a threat to Malaysia’s security by writing ‘sensitive’ and ‘provocative’ articles that may ‘poison’ the minds of Malaysians and make them rise up in opposition to the government.

Yes, we need change. But we need change across the board, not just a change of regime. Both the government and the opposition need to change. And the first change we need is respect for the civil liberties of every Malaysian citizen. Without that fundamental change then a change of government will come to naught. It will just be old wine in a new bottle. And that is not what I mean by change.