MP SPEAKS So far attorney-general (AG) Mohamad Apandi Ali has decided not to pursue with the criminal charges against academician Azmi Sharom, and prior to this, similar charges against DAP MP Teresa Kok were also dropped.

Since both were charged under the draconian Sedition Act, we would be wrong to assume that such withdrawals have improved the image of our present AG.

In my recent tweet, I posted the following comment: "withdrawal of charges against Azmi Sharom is good. But withdrawal all charges on sedition is better. Revocation of Sedition Act is the best"

My tweet, I hope, has duly summed up the entire issue of the Sedition Act.

While it is good for Apandi to withdraw the charges against the law professor under the Sedition Act for allegedly uttering seditious matters involving law, that does not, in any way, mean that the AG can be seen as being fair.

Especially when the AG demonstrated no qualms whatsoever in charging a person under the draconian law, fairness cannot be attributed to him even if he decides to drop such charges later.

The issue is why was there a need to charge any person under this law when PM Najib Abdul Razak had openly declared that the Sedition Act was to be scrapped in toto.

In administrative law, his promise has created legitimate expectation that no Malaysian would be subjected to such a law. But it never happened that way. It happened in Najib's way.

Replacement bill was ready

What we have seen is that, despite his promise, more people especially his political enemies, are currently being harassed under this obnoxious law.

To add insult to injury, the AG is even considering tightening the grip of the law by making major yet draconian amendments to it. All of Najib's promises have gone down the drain.

Being the advisor of the government and the chief prosecutor representing the government, the AG is not free from blame when it involves the Sedition Act.

As an advisor, he should have advised the government to honour its promise of revoking the Sedition Act.

After all the draft of the National Harmony bill, the new law to replace the Sedition Act was ready to be tabled in Parliament.

And being the public prosecutor and given a wide discretionary power not to prosecute anyone under article 145(3) of the federal constitution, he should have a clear conscience of not indicting anybody under this mind boggling law.

If his words that "my decision is made without fear and favour" were to be believed, he should have translated such words into practice.

He should have no fear at all not to prosecute anyone under the Sedition Act even if such a decision is not favourable to the government.

When such a conscience may as well be absent and missing, his decision to withdraw any charges against anybody, who is being prosecuted under the Act, does not make any difference to Malaysians.

Such a decision does not change the status quo.

The Act is still there haunting all Malaysians whenever they exercise their right to speak. It is indeed true when people say that there is freedom of speech in Malaysia but no such freedom after you speak.

MOHAMED HANIPA MAIDIN is MP For Sepang.