Voters may punish govt over Sedition Act, pundits warn

People who previously voted for Pakatan Harapan will not hesitate to punish them at the ballot box if draconian laws such as the Sedition Act 1948 are still maintained and enforced.

According to Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (Unimas) adjunct professor Jayum Anak Jawan, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and his party PKR must keep this in mind as it was part of their reform pledge.

“Political leaders should be sensitive to this as in the last decade or so, the people were not averse to changing the government and its leaders who, in the opinion of the people, are not serving in their best interests.

“When the people speak, the government and leaders must listen because they (the people) put them there (in the government). So, they can remove them through the same democratic process,” the Academy of Sciences Malaysia fellow told Malaysiakini.

The controversial Sedition Act is a colonial-era law that criminalises speech with “seditious tendency”.

Among the definitions of seditious tendency in the act include a tendency to bring hatred or contempt against any ruler, government, or the administration of justice; to promote feelings of ill will and hostility between different races or classes; and to question any privileges reserved for the Malays, natives and royalty.

The British introduced the law in 1948 and was later amended after the May 13, 1969 riots to expand the scope of limitations on freedom of speech.

Harapan had promised to repeal the law as part of the coalition’s manifesto.

Ammo for opposition

Concurring with Jayum’s argument, International Islamic University Malaysia assistant professor Syaza Syukri said the decision to retain the law provides the opposition with opportunities to point out the government’s hypocrisy.

Overall, she added, there are no advantages for Harapan in keeping the law.

“The only advantage I see now is gaining the support of the royal families as the recent Sedition Act (use) was related to the royalty,” she told Malaysiakini.

Syaza was referring to Perikatan Nasional chairperson Muhyiddin Yassin who was charged in a Kelantan court on Aug 27 over his speech during the recent Nenggiri by-election which had irked the Pahang royalty.

Anwar defended the use of the Sedition Act against Muhyiddin, saying the latter must face the consequences of his actions.

Another issue to contend with is whether Malaysians are ready for freedom of speech and expression, especially surrounding 3R (race, religion, royalty) discussions, Syaza pointed out.

“Can we allow people to touch on 3R issues such as what Muhyiddin did? Can we stop equating criticism with sedition?

“Because 3R issues are claimed to be seditious and can cause disharmony,” she said.

Rope in opposition’s support

Political scientist Wong Chin Huat opined that the government could be seen as “selling out the Malays” if the Sedition Act was repealed.

However, this could be avoided if the government could rope in the opposition’s support to repeal the law, he said.

“Politically, many Malays see the Sedition Act as a tool to protect their political dominance and sensitivity from being challenged,” he told Malaysiakini.

To combat the narrative, Wong said the government could implement guidelines for the use of the act, which could reduce partisan hatred splitting Malay voters.

“The government responds to the (matter) by positioning itself as pro-palace, based on the assumption that most Malays are also pro-palace.

“Even if accurate, such a disposition may change over time,” he added.

Wong believed a guideline on the use of the Sedition Act would ensure an impartial, consistent and reasonable application of the act.

It would also work to negate fears that the government is the same “old-style BN authoritarianism in a new package”, he added.

“Doing away with the grey area and ensuring consistent application, the government will emerge as a genuine reformist even if the Sedition Act stays,” he said.

But in repealing the act, Wong said the government would not be seen as hypocritical or “reneging on another promise” which would be an advantage.

Govt's mixed messaging not improving racial, religious ties - report

National Day: PM warns action against groups sowing disharmony

Muslim DAP leaders challenged to report ‘Welcome to Afganu’ image

Dr M laments 3R restriction, ropes in 'acid attack', 'assault'