Human rights advocates condemn ‘unsettling, unacceptable’ penalty for sedition
Advertisement
“UNSETTLING and unacceptable” was how a prominent human rights lawyer described the one-year jail sentence a preacher was slapped with for insulting the Selangor sultan.
Other legal experts also condemned the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) for seeking a harsher punishment for Wan Ji Wan Hussin whose jail sentence was nine months before he appealed to have his conviction and penalty struck out.
This is because the Pakatan Harapan government has stated that it will repeal the Sedition Act, a controversial law from the colonial era under which Wan Ji was charged,
Lawyer Ambiga Sreenevasan said there is no doubt that the sentence is excessive and disproportionate.
“More so when the government has pledged to repeal this archaic act. That this is happening in Malaysia Baru is unsettling and unacceptable,” Ambiga told The Malaysian Insight.
She said that while freedom of speech is not absolute, the Sedition Act has a too-chilling effect on free speech.
“It is an act that is susceptible to abuse by those in power,” said Ambiga, who is former president of the National Human Rights Society (Hakam) as well as the Bar Council.
Wan Ji was sentenced to a year in jail after the Shah Alam High Court rejected his appeal to set aside his conviction and nine-month sentence for insulting the Selangor sultan, which was deemed to be an act of sedition.
Justice Abdul Halim Aman had added three months to Wan Ji’s jail term after considering the prosecution’s counter-appeal. Halim said the words used by Wan Ji in his Facebook posts were insulting to Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah.
Meanwhile, Hakam secretary-general Lim Wei Jiet said the government should immediately impose a moratorium on all cases of sedition while it works towards repealing the law.
“The AGC’s decision to appeal the nine-month sentence goes against the grain of the government’s commitment to repeal the law. Going forward, if there are other sedition cases and the accused appeals, the AGC should not object to the appeal.” – July 10, 2019.