COMMENT | When justice looks the other way, wrongdoers escape punishment

COMMENT | If I had joked about the man who leads the congregation in the mosque and his dalliance with a nubile young woman, hundreds of police reports would have been made, and protests would have been held, baying for blood.

Perhaps I would have had a visit from police officers in the wee hours of the morning, handcuffed and taken away. I am not speaking from experience, but this is what happened to journalist Sidek Kasimo, who had remarked: “Adios, let there be peace” on Twitter (now X) after the death of PAS religious leader, Harun Din, 10 years ago.

How the police took the Spanish word, which means goodbye, as insulting Islam is beyond comprehension. Perhaps they had an overdose of Western movies like "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly”, or watched too many episodes of "High Chaparral" and Manolito’s interspersing Spanish and English, and misunderstood or refused to check if “adios” is derogatory.

At about 4.30am, two plainclothes police officers jumped over the gates of Sidek’s house and banged on the door, demanding entry. The two could not produce an arrest warrant despite Sidek’s repeated request. Before taking Sidek away, they took his laptop from the bedroom.

Sidek’s wife, Norlin Wan Musa, said it was appalling that anyone could just come in and “intimidate someone without an arrest warrant, in the safety of his/her home and take someone away.”

Two weekends ago, Sepang Umno leader Noorazli Said touched a raw nerve when he related a priest touching a nun’s thigh while driving and purportedly linked its punchline to Psalm 129, although the quoted line does not appear in the biblical passage.

But Noorazli (above) is a different kettle of fish. Instead of offering one, he offered a conditional one: denying he intended to insult anyone or any religion, and saying he was prepared to apologise if it caused any misunderstanding.

End of story? Two weeks ago, Bukit Aman Criminal Investigation Department director M Kumar announced police have completed investigations into Noorazli’s speech under Section 298 of the Penal Code and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

(Section 298 covers words, sounds, or gestures intended to wound another person’s religious feelings, while Section 233 concerns the improper use of network facilities or services.)

Kumar said police received 86 reports and recorded statements from 93 witnesses, including members of the public, organisers, and Umno delegates, including Noorazli.

No jumping over the fence, no arrests – just a discreet investigation, recording statements from witnesses.

What happens now? The investigation papers are with the Attorney-General’s Chambers, and don’t expect anything to happen. Remember the DJs who mocked the kavadi carrying? They got away with a slap on the wrist by offering an apology.

Immunity for some

In April, Umno Youth leader Dr Akmal Saleh famously warned: “Don’t touch our race, don’t touch our religion, and don't touch our royalty,” but what his party colleagues were doing in Negeri Sembilan over the past few weeks bordered on treason, and no one has raised a voice.

That is because Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail has drawn the line: If Putrajaya is strict in enforcing laws involving the “3R” issues of religion, race, and royal institution, leaders from PAS would make up most of those implicated.

“I can confirm that if action were taken based on existing laws, many of (PAS secretary-general) Takiyuddin Hassan’s colleagues would be affected,” Sinar Harian quoted Saifuddin (above) as saying.

“If I or the police were to enforce provisions under the Penal Code, the (Communications and Multimedia Act), or other laws, they would be among the most frequently penalised,” he added.

So, I asked: “Is he confirming that members of the Islamic party are treated with velvet gloves and, above all, there is selective police action and prosecution? Is this why no action has been taken against those making provocative statements touching the 3Rs?”

By extension, the same applies to Umno leaders, who too enjoy the same privileges, and some consider themselves "kebal" (immune).

In August 2008, then Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Ahmad Ismail sparked widespread national outcry when he referred to Chinese Malaysians as “squatters” who were staying temporarily in the country but was never prosecuted.

Remember the protest organised by then Sungai Besar Umno leader Jamal Yunos in September 2015? During a massive pro-government “Red Shirt” counter-rally, demonstrators openly chanted anti-Chinese slurs and told non-Malays to “keep their place”.

When questioned, Jamal (above) defended the use of the slurs in a press conference, further exacerbating racial tensions. He was arrested under Section 105 of the Penal Code, but he did not face criminal charges. Instead, subordinates, including his division secretary, were fined for organising illegal rallies.

In March, I had already foretold the consequences: “Against this backdrop, official assurances of ‘taking action’ ring hollow. Our enforcement authorities, whether constrained by political expediency or institutional inertia, appear paralysed when confronting the privileged class.

“Any suggestion of double standards is met with reflexive declarations that “no one is above the law” - a mantra repeated so often it has lost all meaning.

“The nation watches, less in awe than in anger, as some break the law with impunity while others face its full weight. The authorities' subdued response to these transgressions has cemented a public perception that justice in Malaysia is not blind - in some cases, it merely looks the other way.”

Is law applied equally

Even our leaders have on several occasions reiterated the same – no one is above the law. However, when someone or a group of people is above the law, equality before the law is ended. This is how some have been treated in the past, which threatens to undermine one of the basic doctrines of democracy.

Former United States president Theodore Roosevelt also famously said that obedience to the law is demanded, not asked as a favour. Why hasn't this been done, especially in the case of the miscreants who tried to remove their ruler?

Or is the law turning a blind eye because they happen to be in the right party?

The issue is no longer whether offensive remarks were made, nor whether the authorities are aware of them. The issue is whether the law is being applied equally. Malaysians have been told repeatedly that no one is above the law, yet the reality often suggests otherwise.

Some individuals are arrested, handcuffed, paraded in purple uniform, investigated aggressively, and publicly shamed for far less, while others appear to enjoy a level of tolerance that ordinary citizens can only dream of.

The danger lies not merely in selective enforcement, but in the message it sends. When political affiliation, religious standing, or proximity to power determines the strength of police action, public confidence in the justice system erodes. A law applied unevenly ceases to be an instrument of justice - it becomes a tool of convenience.

If the authorities truly believe in the principles they so often invoke, then the standard must be the same for everyone. The fence-jumping zeal displayed in some cases cannot be replaced by discreet inaction in others. Equality before the law is not a slogan to be recited at press conferences. It is the foundation upon which democratic legitimacy rests.

The question confronting Malaysians is therefore stark and unavoidable: are we governed by the rule of law, or by the rule of connections? Until we answer that question through consistent action rather than reassuring rhetoric, every claim that "no one is above the law" will sound less like a principle - more like a political slogan.

R NADESWARAN is a veteran journalist who tries to live up to the ethos of civil rights leader John Lewis: “When you see something that is not right, not fair, not just, you have to speak up. You have to say something; you have to do something.” Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

Don't hide behind excuses, explain why you signed proclamation, ex-N Sembilan MB tells Ismail

Disputed N Sembilan chieftains criticise Tuanku Muhriz over exco removal

Legal experts propose royal tribunal, emergency rule to solve N Sembilan crisis

'Overtaken by events' - MB dodges shifting loyalty, 'forced to sign' posers

COMMENT | Why do Muslim converts attack their ancestors' heritage?

Hadi free to criticise DAP, but not cross into slander, sedition - party leaders