As BN weakens, royalty drawn into the fray
YOURSAY 'Ex-judge Mohd Noor Abdullah seems to have forgotten that in 1983 and 1993, it was Umno which committed ‘treason'.'
Vijay47: During those unfortunate years when he was foisted upon us as a judge, Mohd Noor Abdullah gained neither acknowledgment for his presence nor respect for judicial wisdom. He was just a pitiful non-entity.
Years after his retirement, he has ventured forth again into the public domain, reflecting indisputably all those facets and traits which confirm how he was least qualified to hold that sacred judicial office.
Basking now in the frenzied admiration of fellow lesser minds, Mohd Noor is unable to disassociate himself from this adulation, disreputable as it is.
In suggesting a Treason Act specifically in regard to royalty only when a host of worse crimes are openly practised, he again exhibits the narrow boundaries beyond which his little mind will not function.
Other judges have failed before him for forgetting their office and committing the judiciary's ultimate sin of partiality. On this sole score perhaps, Mohd Noor should not be damned. Imbecility is inherent, not acquired.
Gerard Lourdesamy: The good judge seems to have forgotten that in 1983 and 1993, it was Umno which committed "treason" by vilifying, denigrating and abusing the rulers through a mass campaign of disinformation during the constitutional crisis to remove the powers and privileges of the rulers.
Treason is already an offence under the Penal Code. If all parties are truly sincere in wanting to defend and protect the royal institution then:
a) Restore the prerogative powers of the rulers prior to the constitutional amendments, especially with regard to the royal assent;
b) Restore the immunity of the rulers;
c) Give back the rulers discretion on whether to accept or reject advice tendered to them by the PM, MB or CM;
d) Increase the Civil List (to be indexed to the rate of inflation) for the rulers and their consorts and also extend it to immediate members of the royal family who carry out public functions; and
e) Give more media attention to the public duties carried out by the rulers.
Odin: The punishment for treason is death - by hanging or firing squad.
If you talk about different forms of punishment, in this case a minimum penalty of a two-year jail sentence, then the offence you are talking about isn't treason but lese majesty, no?
TehTarik: In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one's sovereign or nation.
This ex-judge fails to understand that freedom of speech does not allow an individual to question the powers, rights and privileges of the Chinese and Indians that has been enshrined in the constitution.
We should also suggest a minimum two-year prison sentence for him.
Abasir: Treason anyone? This from our loyal Umno-controlled MSM (mainstream media) from December 1992 to February 1993 (source: Hornbill Unleashed).
Some headlines: ‘House ruler abuse power: Lim Keng Yaik'; ‘Pressure from palace, Pahang royalty demands more timber concession'; ‘Lim: 93,000 acres given to sultan'.
‘Customs seize three luxury cars - one of the cars was seized from a timber tycoon on suspicion of evading import duty using an ‘approved permit' issued to Pahang sultan'.
‘PM: No more extra benefits, Rulers to get only privileges'; ‘Kedah withdraws all perks given to royal household'; ‘Government sets limits on royal privileges'.
‘Kedah sultan gets 160ha concession a year: State government paid RM250,000 for expenses incurred by the sultan on an overseas trip'; ‘No more jobs for ‘royal contractor''; ‘Najib: Rulers have abused armed forces personnel'.
‘RM62.32 million spent on renovation of the king's palace in 1989'; ‘6.8 million spent on cutlery, RM2.5 million spent on bedspreads and RM300,000 spent on storing the bedspreads'; ‘RM16 million needed to maintain nine palaces'; ‘Land wrested from the landless, Muhyiddin pledges full probe'.
So Mohd Noor, please make your proposed Treason Act retroactive and let the circus begin.
Ukinana: What is more important - to protect the royal institution or to defend the country's sovereignty against those who issue IC (identity card) to foreigners, and those who sell Navy technical specification to foreign defence bidders?
Quigonbond: The ex-poor-excuse-for-a-judge obviously is not aware how backwards he's driving Malaysia into.
He should remember that Dr Mahathir Mohamad was the one who introduced the special constitutional courts to try rulers under the constitution, in line with people's aspiration that rulers should not be above the constitution. Is the judge saying that nothing bad can be spoken of the rulers even when they go bad?
In the effort to fully democratise Malaysia, public opinion should decide whether someone has crossed the line or not - just look at how Pauline Hanson and her right-wing movement died off in Australia.
Not everything needs to be regulated, unless in this case, the ex-judge acting as Umno surrogate is simply trying to please the rulers because Umno and BN's position has become increasingly untenable.
Worried Sick: Mohd Noor is just worming his way into the authorities' good books. After all, isn't he under investigation for his speech against the Chinese? So by coming up with this stupid idea, he thinks all will be forgiven.
Giudice: If something enshrined in the constitution cannot be challenged or questioned, how did BN manage to amend the constitution so many times?
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
For more news and views that matter, subscribe and support independent media for only RM0.36 sen a day:Subscribe now