Last week, the murderers of Altantuya Shaariibuu - Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar - were finally sentenced to death for their crime by the Federal Court. Many were rejoicing over the decision, and subsequently furious when it was discovered that Sirul is now living in Australia.

I love some of the comments from people on the social media; “bring him home to the noose,” was one urging. And of course, many went truly ‘conspiracy theory’ crazy, alluding that he got away because the PM or his posse had arranged it.

Insane theories aside, there were also questions raised on how Sirul got his passport to have ran off to Australia last November. Well, both of them were free men after the court acquitted them in 2008, because no one (read: the prosecution) applied for them to be remanded pending the appeal.

Down Under has apparently denied the extradition order on the basis that Sirul is facing the death penalty. As of yet, nobody has actually written out to appeal for the death penalty to be set aside for life imprisonment. Not a single one.

I find it interesting because we have had a strong presence of those who reject the death penalty, and at one point Amnesty International had urged for a moratorium on capital punishment.

Yet in this case, Amnesty, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the Human Rights Council (HRC) even, who had been so loud about lawyer Eric Paulsen’s arrest , are quiet.

I guess they are a pressure group with their own agendas.

So, I have to ask: Is it because they are too high profile for you to take the case, or is it because there is a level of hypocrisy even within these NGOs when it comes to calling out against the death penalty because of who they are?

I’ll wait for them to talk; but I won’t hold my breath.

I am for the death penalty through a court of law. I’ve never had any qualms telling people about it. And let me emphasise that I said “a court of law” before someone reacts with the simple tit-for-tat of extremists and terrorists.

‘Archaic Malaysian laws’

But I am honestly quizzed by the fact that the same people who believe in the freedom of speech - supporting it to their very core as part of our human rights - have remained silent on this issue.

This all being said, however, Malaysian laws are archaic and our citizenry is still stuck in believing the government knows best, especially when it comes to laws.

The Sedition Act, the Official Secrets Act (OSA) and even the Internal Security Act (ISA) are such cases, and so are our religious laws. These require review and abolition, where it does not apply to the Malaysia of today.

Similarly, laws relating to drug offences require review as well.

Even our Penal Code requires review - particularly Section 377 - because why on Earth are we criminalising what people do in their personal spaces, if they don’t record it and put it on YouTube or Pornhub?

It goes back to what Malaysia believes in. Do we, as a majority, believe that the value of a life is repayable by taking another?

Do we believe in the concept of ‘an eye for an eye will actually make you go blind’, or do we throw that to the wind because we hate these particular people?

I think Malaysians need to think deeply about this particular issue, because it is an international cause that determines what kind of society we wish to be.

And I’m also keeping an eye out on those so-called “liberal” advocates and NGO leaders on what they are saying about this, because this is where you can see the true hypocrisy of their stances.