I refer to the letter by Huan Cheng Guan, Centre for Political Awareness in Malaysiakini (Jan 21).

Let me say, without a doubt, it is obvious that Huan is one person who has a personal bias against Anwar Ibrahim from the way he wrote his commentary piece. The entire piece is nothing but an attempt to tear apart Anwar’s integrity and nothing else.

Like it or not, it nothing more than propaganda. I wonder if Huan would write the same thing of any other Tom, Dick or Harry who has been turned down from entering Japan.

Demand for an explanation

While Huan’s argument holds that the Japanese government has the sole discretion to grant permission to enter the country or otherwise, Anwar as a citizen of this country, and its opposition leader, has the right to demand for an explanation why he was being denied entry.

It is only in Huan’s context of Malaysia, where everything is stamped Official Secrets Act (OSA), that Huan is saying that Japan does not have the obligation to reveal the reason for denying Anwar’s entry.

If the Japanese immigration officers had revealed that there was a report in 2013, as a citizen of this country, I am also interested to know what this report is about and whether it is justified for the report to be circulated to other nations, especially when it involves the opposition leader of a democratic country.

Huan is apparently not familiar with the Freedom of Information Act, since he has been living in the dark age of OSA.

The reason that Japan has to be more forthcoming is because there are bilateral ties between Japan and Malaysia. We are not thanking about countries that are at war, stupid! Neither are we talking about countries where there is no diplomatic relations. In the past, these countries would have been USSR, China and other communist countries and South Africa. Today, it is only Israel.

The Japanese embassy is here in Kuala Lumpur for a simple reason, that it represents the government of Japan. When a citizen of this country makes enquiries at the embassy as a pre-travel procedural check, it is to ensure that the trip will not be unfruitful.

In the case of Anwar, Japan has therefore set a dangerous precedent that anyone can be turned down at the immigration point without an explanation. Such things have happened in Malaysia, but Japan as a First World Country should be more up-front in stating on what basis Anwar was denied entry into Japan, especially since the Japanese embassy in Kuala Lumpur had given him the nod and he was officially invited by the Nippon Foundation.

If it can happen to Anwar, it can also happen to any tourist to Japan in the future. What their embassy say would not hold water and if Huan is right, he, too, could be deported back to Malaysia the next time he travels to Japan, assuming that there is a change of government and Anwar is prime minister. Huan would have faced some god-knows-what charges, and a ‘report’ submitted by the new foreign minister.

In my opinion, the Foreign Affairs Ministry should even officially summon the Japanese ambassador to demand an explanation why a citizen of this country was denied entry into Japan without due warning unless the Japanese government has changed its policy within the past few years.

After all, Anwar had entered Japan on several occasions in the past, and while Huan is right that it does not automatically mean Anwar is allowed to enter freely, there is a problem reconciling why the immigration officials flip-flopped in their explanations.

Flip-flop

First, the Japanese immigration officials said that it was due to a previous conviction in 1999. But Anwar had travelled to Japan on a number of occasions.

On Anwar’s insistence, then, they finally blurted out the truth that a report had been made recently, probably in 2013.

I wonder why the Japanese immigration could not be more specific to state why Anwar, a Malaysian citizen, was barred from entering into Japan on an official invitation from the Nippon Foundation.

If I were Anwar, I would also demand to know why I was barred from entering Japan. Anwar as a political leader of high standing in this country has the right to know whether the report in 2013 was crafted to ‘fitnah’ him.

While Japan has the right to deny entry, it has an obligation to tell Anwar why he was barred from entering Japan. The Japanese government has to remember that today Anwar may be the opposition leader, tomorrow, he may be the prime minister.

At this juncture, should the Selangor or Penang state governments choose to react negatively to the incident - which of course, they would not - both state governments could give a lot of problems to the Japanese investors who have set foot in these states.

After all, when you are arrested by the police, you have the right to demand on what basis you are arrested. After all, the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' is a universal rule of law. Right to information as universal for the individual, unless Japan is coming under dictatorial rule.

The same would have happened to any politician, including Lee Kuan Yew, former prime minister of Singapore, if he was denied entry into Malaysia because he had included a meeting with Anwar.

Or, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad is denied entry into Singapore, there would be a lot of hue and cry from within Malaysia. Anwar’s response is understandable given his situation, where Umno has used all sorts of gutter politics and smear campaigns against him.

In fact, it is my contention that Anwar can and should raise this matter with the United Nations to ensure that such a decision to bar someone’s entry is not done at one’s whims and fancies.

Huan, of all persons, being the head of a so-called NGO for political awareness, should be more objective in his response. It is because he was biased on one end, that I choose to give my views contrary to his.

STEPHEN NG is a chemist by training. He dealt with printing ink, paint and emulsion polymer for 15 years before becoming a freelance writer.