Yoursay: Impose moratorium on sedition cases until Act is repealed

YOURSAY | ‘Since AG cannot direct cabinet, the moratorium order must come from the latter.’

AG unaware of cross-appeal in Wan Ji case before enhanced sentence

Gerard Lourdesamy: Just issue a directive to all deputy public prosecutors, including the head of prosecution in the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) and in the states, that all cases involving the Sedition Act 1948 both at first instance and on appeal must be referred to the attorney-general before they can be commenced, continued with and appealed.

Lawyers for accused persons should write to make representations to the AGC, rather than wait for the media to highlight their client's cases after a conviction.

The cabinet should recommend that the attorney-general place a moratorium on all prosecutions under the Act until it is repealed.

Anonymous_b3cdcd05: @Gerard Lourdesamy, that is precisely what the attorney-general contends. He doesn't make the laws. Neither can he direct the cabinet.

The moratorium must come from the cabinet. The ball is in the cabinet's court.

Abasir: A valiant attempt by AG Tommy Thomas to explain the continued subversion of the people’s voice and aspirations under Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s rule of law.

So tell us Mr AG, how many cases are there pending prosecution under the Sedition Act? Ten thousand? One thousand? Eight hundred? Two hundred?

Have they been isolated for review in light of the election results, the mythical manifesto and what appears to be deliberate forgetfulness by Mahathir?

Did you alert the self-serving, inept cabinet about the consequences of further ignoring its electoral promise?

Don’t you have a periodic review of politically-sensitive cases which when mindlessly pursued will only serve to distract the nation from the real work at hand?

You may be trying very hard to cope with the inherited mess, but have you considered reorganising internally for greater efficiency?

Vgeorgemy: Preacher Wan Ji Wan Hussin should have submitted certain legal representation directly to the attorney-general’s attention to have the matter addressed as human rights violations.

Let’s see how the appeal process addresses the rakyat’s concern.

Manoharan Malayalam: It looks like to get justice, you need media attention; otherwise you are doomed.

Must everyone seek media attention, followed by a public outcry, in order to get justice in this country? What happens if the media doesn’t cover the story?

Must ministers and the administration work only on cases highlighted by the media?

FairMind: The biggest blame falls on the Pakatan Harapan government, which has been slow to repeal the Sedition Act.

There is no excuse for Harapan to drag its feet on the repeal of the Sedition Act, especially when it is stated in the Harapan manifesto and Harapan is already more than a year into its term in office.

Rejected for exec job at TNB because BMI 'too high', claims woman

Anonymous 2327531438397239: Being overweight should not be seen as a deterrent against hiring someone if the employee has the right credentials and qualifications to do the job.

An exception to this rule lies with jobs requiring specific determinants like flight attendants, fashion models, aesthetics consultants, gym trainers, et cetera, where image and physique play a major role in the job.

Companies should take a more professional approach by eliminating the Body Mass Index (BMI) clause, or use an appropriate answer to reject a candidate.

Eleos: I sympathise with the lady.

Obesity carries health risks including diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, osteoarthritis and cancer. It has edged upwards to become the number one risk factor for cancers of the breast, uterus, lungs, and pancreas.

Employers would be expected to pay for, or at least subsidise, the treatment of their employees - hence their reluctance to employ the obese.

Mano: This is not discrimination, like that against race, religion, or the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and queer community (LGBTQ), et cetera.

Obesity carries more risks and extra medical costs in the long run. Companies have the right to choose the candidate they want in order to reduce their costs.

Fair Play: For health insurance coverage, I suppose an excessive BMI is considered an employment risk.

If one considers this as discrimination, at least it is fair discrimination or uniform discrimination as it applies to all races and religions as well.

Sinan Belawan: I disagree. This is discrimination, and women's groups should take up the issue. Are fat men turned away from jobs?

Companies should choose candidates based on merit. Does he or she "qualify" for the job?

Look at the company's pre-job tests, are those tests involving only mental/intellectual tests, or do they also include physical tests?

Does the job description involve safety matters, for example, is he required to be outdoors, on the move or lifting things all the time? Or just doing desk work?

If the job description involves lifting cables, and being outdoors, it is understandable if a candidate is rejected. But if it's only desk work, what is the issue?

If the company is worried about having to bear medical costs for future medical problems, look at the worker's medical history - if the history is clean, what is the issue?

If companies today are encouraged to terminate employees based on weight, tomorrow, probably even getting a scar across the cheek (because of a nasty fall or accident) would be grounds to terminate you.

Anonymous_f0124ca6: Is an employer entitled to consider potential health expenses of potential employees when offering employment? It is a tricky wicket with no clear answers.  - Mkini