Tian Chua shouldn’t have been charged in the first place

Now that the Kuala Lumpur High Court has upheld the acquittal of PKR vice-president Chua Tian Chang, I have to say that Tian Chua (as he is better known) should not have been charged with sedition at all in the first place.

In my past articles, I have mentioned the reasons why, but nothing confirms my suspicion more than the two court prosecutions, which led to decisions that acquitted Chua, were nothing but attempts at intimidating the Batu lawmaker.

The way I look at it, this was also a way to distract the people’s attention from what actually transpired during the Sulu intrusion.

Wrong tactical decision

Initially, the crisis was handled by the police. Only after several police commandos had beene killed, did the military took over. To a lay person like me, this was already a wrong tactical decision handled by both the then-Home Affairs Minister Hishammuddin Hussein and then-Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

It was obvious that the Sulu invaders were armed and was at war with the people of Sabah. How then can our police handle such a situation?

When the police commandos were being sent in without the necessary protection such as armoured vehicles, they became easy targets for the Sulu invaders who were hiding in nooks and corners. Without proper armoured vehicles, they would become easy targets.

Therefore, when I read news about the sedition charges against Chua for allegedly saying that our police commandos “mati katak” (die in vain), I was shocked. There would not have been a description more apt than that.

This is why I found it hard to understand why some 500 police reports were lodged against Chua for his remarks, but no police reports were lodged against the two cabinet ministers for the way they handled the crisis.

The one who should have been sacked for failing to respond to such a threat to national security was Zahid. As Defence Minister (and now Deputy Prime Minister), he should have immediately taken over from Hishammuddin.

If the military had been sent in much earlier, would our police commandos not have died?

Another such case

Now, Chua’s case is not the only case taken to court. When another PKR vice-president, Nurul Izzah Anwar, met casually with the ‘princess of Sulu’ Jacel Kiram, she was referred to the Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee.

It was not as though Nurul Izzah had actively sought the meeting with Jacel. They were just casually introduced to each other; it was simply courteous for both of them to exchange greetings with each other. Why were 109 police reports lodged against Nurul Izzah for just that simple gesture?

On the contrary, why was no police report lodged against Najib Abdul Razak for shaking hands with the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu?

My question is, does the Malaysian government even recognise the existence of a Sulu sultanate? If not, how do we now call her the princess of Sulu? This is absolutely nonsensical.

To me, Nurul was meeting with an ordinary lady. Whatever Jacel wished to call herself - she can call herself ‘Sleeping Beauty’ or even ‘Cinderella’ - she is not a princess of any sultanate that does not exist. What is the point then of censuring Nurul Izzah then?

If anything, Najib should be the one to be called to face the rights committee, because he showed a friendly gesture to Netanyahu, the prime minister of a country clearly not recognised by the Malaysian government. But, then again, what the heck! There is no reason why a handshake should even be avoided in a global village when two leaders met.

It’s hard for me to understand since it is considered all right for Muslims that Najib shook hands with Netanyahu, but not Nurul Izzah meeting casually with a fellow Muslim.

What an irony!

---

STEPHEN NG is an ordinary citizen with an avid interest in following political developments in the country since 2008. -Mkini