MARCH 28 — In August last year, I shared what the judges have said about freedom of speech, sedition, seditious intention.
It started with that statement by the doyen of Malaysian judges, Raja Azlan Shah (as His Royal Highness then was), in the celebrated case of Public Prosecutor V Ooi Kee Saik & Ors [1)971]. The learned High Court judge (as His Royal Highness then was) said:
“A line must be drawn between the right to freedom of speech and sedition… [W]e must resist the tendency to regard the right to freedom of speech as self-subsistent or absolute. The right to freedom of speech is simply the right which everyone has to say, write or publish what he pleases so long as he does not commit a breach of the law. If he says or publishes anything expressive of a seditious tendency he is guilty of sedition.” (Emphasis added)
In this country the court draws the line. When such a line is drawn, it should provide enough caution to persons embarking upon the path of criticism.
In drawing such a line, the court cannot be expected to weigh the right to freedom of speech and sedition as though it is measuring it in the nice balance of a jeweller’s scale.
The Federal Court has, in recent years, declared the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15) constitutional and that its penalties are a reasonable restriction on the right to free speech. — Picture by Choo Choy May
Suffice if the court can expound some principle by which a citizen may be guided as to when the light of freedom of speech recedes, and the darkness of sedition begins. (See the judgment of Abdul Hamid J (as he then was) in Public Prosecutor v Fan Yew Teng [1975]
The Federal Court has, in recent years, declared the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15) constitutional and that its penalties are a reasonable restriction on the right to free speech. (See, e.g. the case of Kerajaan Malaysia v Mat Shuhaimi bin Shafiei [2018])
For the purpose of proving the commission of an offence under Act 15, the intention of the accused is irrelevant if in fact the act, speech, words or publication has a seditious tendency. This is clear from s 3(3) of Act 15 which provides:
For the purpose of proving the commission of any offence against this Act the intention of the person charged at the time he did or attempted to do or made any preparation to do or conspired with any person to do any act or uttered any seditious words or printed, published, sold, offered for sale, distributed, reproduced or imported any publication or did any other thing shall be deemed to be irrelevant if in fact the act had, or would, if done, have had, or the words, publication or thing had a seditious tendency.
Section 3(1) of Act 15 says seditious tendency includes “to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or of the Ruler of any State or amongst the inhabitants of Malaysia or of any State” — paragraph (e).
So, again, mind our words.
Now, the Quran says:
“O believers!˺ Do not insult what they invoke besides Allah or they will insult Allah spitefully out of ignorance. This is how We have made each people’s deeds appealing to them. Then to their Lord is their return, and He will inform them of what they used to do.” (Al-An’am: 108)
The scholar al-Sabuni said that the above verse means that a Muslim should not curse or insult the subjects of belief of other religions because they will respond by insulting Allah in a state of ignorance and exaggeration.
The Prophet’s companion Ibn Abbas (ra) said that Allah forbade the believers from criticizing or insulting the idols of other religions. (See Safwah al-Tafsir, p. 380).
Former Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, who is also a former Mufti of the Federal Territories, Dr Haji Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri wrote:
“Based on [the above] verse of the Quran, it is clear that Allah forbids Muslims from criticising or insulting other religions because it causes them to retaliate by criticizing Allah and also the religion of Islam. What’s more, if it involves direct criticism and insult to the religion of Islam, then the prohibition and prohibition of doing such an act is even clearer.”
Insults beget insults. So don’t insult.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
