Gurdwara Council should help cool things down

MM Online - Blogger’s racist attack against Amar Singh invites hate against Sikhs, council says (extracts):

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 30 — The Malaysian Gurdwaras Council has condemned controversial blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s remarks against veteran policeman Comm Datuk Seri Amar Singh as derogatory and racist.

Its president Jagir Singh also said the remarks towards the Bukit Aman Commercial Crime Investigation Department (CCID) director are also likely to create hate and disrespect towards the Sikh community in Malaysia.

“The turban to a Sikh is an article of faith that represents honour, self-respect, courage, self-confidence, spirituality and piety,” he said in a statement.

Jagir said the turban is also a reminder to every Sikh of his duty and responsibility to uphold truth and justice at all times.

Last Friday Amar criticised Raja Petra for alleging RM43.3 million had been stolen by the police following the raids on former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s premises in May, calling it “baseless and simply ludicrous”.

The blogger responded with a vicious attack on Amar’s turban, prompting Amar to express his surprise over the retort.

This is sheer over-the-top and unnecessary fanning of a wee campfire into a raging conflagration. I am disappointed that the Malaysian Gurdwaras Council is making a turban mountain out of RPK's cheeky molehill response to Amar Singh's warning-threat to him.

RPK did blog on the disparity between police and Najib's numbers in the amount of cash taken away from Najib's residences by police for investigation. There was then a war of words between the two, with the police commissioner describing RPK as not a investigative reporter but a mercenary writer.

Earlier, Amar Singh did warn RPK about his post - NST reported:

Amar Singh has challenged blogger, Raja Petra Kamarudin, to be brave and come forward to lodge a police report in Malaysia if he has credible information that police had stolen RM43.3million believed to belong to Umno.

“I will not pay heed to such a writer. RPK claims to be an investigative journalist, but looks very far from that.

“This is a frivolous and vexatious accusation against the police and I will not stay quiet against such an accusation.

“This is a baseless accusation. If he has such information on him, please lodge a police report in Malaysia, and don’t hide behind the cyber curtain.

“So, I am urging him to be brave. Action will be taken against him if the report is proven false,”

What RPK then wrote was "Amar Singh Ishar Singh’s turban must be too tight that it is restricting the flow of blood to his brain".

RPK was cheekily referring to the possibility of poor flow of blood to Amar Singh's brain, thus making the policeman's thinking naive in calling him (RPK) 'mercenary writer'. RPK retorted: Everyone is a mercenary, Amar Singh included. We all work for money, every single human being in this world. Even Mother Teresa needed money, plenty of money, to do what she did. What, did you think Mother Teresa just raised her hands to the sky and prayed to God for help and bread dropped from the sky?

RPK's line above, namely, "Amar Singh Ishar Singh’s turban must be too tight that it is restricting the flow of blood to his brain" plus his following clarification have nothing to do with the subject of Sikh turban per se, but rather, Amar Singh's reasoning powers.

As I mentioned earlier, Amar Singh obviously has (a) ultra sensitive feelings and (b) no sense of humour, perhaps indirectly proving RPK's point. His accusation of RPK being racist in this instance has been pathetic and irrelevant, especially after his determined resolve not to pay any heed to such a writer.

And the Malaysian Gurdwaras Council has definitely gone over board by commenting that RPK's line has been "vicious" and also likely to create hate and disrespect towards the Sikh community in Malaysia.

That has been just plain silly and really, nonsensically making a turban mountain out of a wisecrack molehill.

Saying "Amar Singh's turban must be too tight" in that context was equivalent to saying "Singh has his knickers in a knot".

It means specifically "to become overly upset or emotional over something, especially that which is unimportant" as per the Police Director of the Commercial Crime Investigation Department challenging/warning/threatening an overseas unofficial/private blogger for his speculative post.

But ooops, I might have unwittingly offended another of Amar Singh's 'Sikh sacred issue', namely the Kaccha (cotton underwear) - no offence intended. Please blame it on the English for their politically incorrect idiom.

kaccha 

Apart from being disappointed with the Malaysian Gurdwaras Council for ratcheting up a silly issue when it should be cooling down the unnecessary acrimonious exchanges of words, I opine that Amar Singh and the Council members should be geographicists with their common propensity to "make mountains out of molehills". Wakakaka.

Looks like I'll live forever

MM Online - International Coffee Day 2018: How your daily caffeine fix might also be boosting your health (extracts):

NEW YORK, Sept 30 — October 1 marks International Coffee Day 2018, which celebrates one of the most popular drinks around the world. But your morning cup of joe might be doing more than just setting you up for the day, with recent research suggesting that it may also bring a variety of health benefits. Here we round up some of the findings.

Lower risk of heart problems

Research presented at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions last year suggested that drinking coffee may decrease the risk of developing heart failure or having a stroke. The preliminary research showed that compared with non-coffee drinkers, drinking coffee was associated with a 7 per cent lower risk of developing heart disease and an 8 per cent lower risk of having a stroke with every additional cup of coffee consumed per week.

Live longer?

A large-scale study presented at last year’s European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress found that Mediterranean coffee drinkers may benefit from a lower risk of death. After following 19,896 Spanish adults for an average of ten years, researchers found that participants who consumed at least four cups of coffee per day had a 65 per cent lower risk of all-cause mortality compared to those who never or almost never consumed coffee. They also found that overall, there was a 25 per cent lower risk of all-cause mortality for each 2 additional cups of total coffee per day, with the positive effect even stronger in those over the age of 45.

Reduced risk of liver disease

A report published late last year found that coffee may also reduce the risk of liver diseases such as liver cancer and cirrhosis. After meeting to discuss recent research into coffee and liver health, experts from seven European countries found that meta-analyses suggest that drinking coffee is associated with up to a 40 per cent risk reduction of liver cancer compared to not drinking coffee ...

Wow, looks like I am going to live forever. Since I was a kid, like most kids in good old Penang, I have been drinking Penang-Malaysian style kopi -aw and, admittedly for some years in UK, USA, Oz and NZ, Nescafe-type Western coffee.

When I was in Indon and Thailand for some while, I drank their kopi. In Thailand the locals called it O-Liang which was basically Penang style kopi-aw-peng (with ice).

And mate, I drank at least 4 to 5 cups per day, even before I knocked off for bed, wakakaka.

I wonder whether I'll live to be as old as one prime minister, wakakaka.

Once UMNO feared him, now Pakatan does also

FMT - Why do we love to attack Anwar?:

by TK Chua

I have no idea how Anwar Ibrahim will behave or perform when, or if, he becomes the prime minister. However, it is fair to say that no past prime ministers of Malaysia, including Dr Mahathir Mohamad (who has become the prime minister for the second time), have ever had to go through the ordeal and challenges like Anwar.

Other prime ministers, particularly the two recent ones before Mahathir, were more or less given the coveted post without much scrutiny and fanfare. The people were hardly critical of them when they were first appointed prime ministers. As it turned out, their performances were way below our expectations. In fact, we can only count on their collateral damage.

As for Anwar, it was an endless struggle 20 years in the making. But judging from the Whatsapp messages I received each day heaping insults and insinuations on him, I think his ordeal is far from over despite his resolve and tenacity.

Please don’t get me wrong, I am not a diehard supporter of Anwar. I am just musing over how we Malaysians in general look at issues, events and personalities.

All past PMs championed race and religion, but somehow we are particularly harsh on Anwar for his ultra “Malayness” and “Islamic tendency”. I wonder why.

I wonder why we are so doubtful of Anwar and love to attack him so much.

We criticise him for practising nepotism when his wife and daughter were reluctant politicians who only entered politics because of Anwar’s predicament. We label him ultra-conservative one minute and ultra-liberal the next.

We doubt his pardon by the Agong and even accuse him of lying on behalf of the Agong. Some lawyers are now saying Anwar is not qualified to stand as a candidate (in Port Dickson). Some politicians are saying Mahathir should serve his full term. I wonder what is next to get Anwar out of the way.

We never stop ridiculing him. Even his political comeback at the Port Dickson by-election is paved with absurd and weird contestants.

With Umno gracefully bowing out, we are now left with a party obsessed with caning women to challenge him.

And who is that former leader saddled with an endless chequered past to challenge Anwar?

Who is that accuser who had wasted enough time of this country and is now trying to recycle his antics hopefully to gather another round of attention?

And who are those independents probably hoping for a “Prabakaran” act?

At least getting the present Umno deputy president to challenge Anwar would have been more credible.

Are we grasping at the last straw to deny Anwar his rightful place?

Sangeet criticised Ampang Court's feather-light sentence for paedophile religious teacher

FMT - Sangeet: 15-month jail term for paedophile ‘grossly inadequate’:

FMT photo 

PETALING JAYA: DAP today criticised the 15-month jail term for a religious teacher convicted of sexual offences against children, labelling it “grossly inadequate” and “clearly disproportionate”.

The deputy chair for Selangor DAP Wanita, Sangeet Kaur Deo, also urged the Attorney-General’s Chambers to appeal against the sentence, which she said did not do justice to the victims and their families.

Sangeet, daughter of the late Karpal Singh, said the sentence meted out by the Ampang Magistrate’s Court on Zahari Alwi failed to reflect the seriousness of the offences, particularly against children who were helpless and vulnerable placed in his care.

Zahari, 56, who operates a welfare centre in Kuala Lumpur, recently pleaded guilty to two charges which involved allegations of insulting the modesty of a person and having possession of an obscene film.

Zahari was alleged to have watched a 10-year-old girl using the bathroom in December 2015. Police later discovered a pornographic video of the victim on the suspect’s laptop in January the following year.

The magistrate handed down a sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment for the first charge and 13 months’ imprisonment for the second charge, and ordered the sentences to run concurrently.

Sangeet said the maximum sentence for the first charge is imprisonment of not more than five years or fine or both, while the maximum sentence for the second charge is imprisonment of not more than five years or fine of not more than RM50,000.00.

“Such lenient sentences would not be an effective deterrent against would-be sexual predators and paedophiles,” she said in a statement, adding that heavier sentences were needed in the interest of the children.

Sangeet went on to state that the seriousness of such offences was acknowledged by Parliament which had enacted the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 to tackle such crimes.

The court, therefore, she said, had the responsibility to ensure fairness and justice is served and deliver a sentence that is proportionate to the seriousness of the offence committed.

Innocent children, Sangeet said, must be protected not only by way of legislation but by way of effective enforcement as well.

“Severe punishment is needed to deter other members of the public from committing similar offences”.

That monstrous paedophile was found guilty of sexual offences against CHILDREN including watching a porn video of a 10-year-old girl using the bathroom, and he receives only 15 months jail?

Sangeet description of that sentence as "grossly" inadequate has been absolutely correct. Whoever was the magistrate of the Ampang Magistrate’s Court that handed down that ridiculously feather-light sentence ought to be sacked a.s.a.p.

In June 1999, Anwar Ibrahim's first sodomy case, of homosexual activities between two adults, the former DPM was sentenced to 9 years imprisonment.

In his 2nd sodomy case in 2004 he was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment.

In both Anwar's cases, no children was involved.

Yet in the current case of the religious teacher sexually abusing children, apart from additionally watching a porn video which showed private ablution acts of a small 10-year old girl, he gets only 1 year 3 months.

As I mentioned, that magistrate should be sacked and/or reprimanded/demoted kaukau.

PD by-election - what confronts Anwar Ibrahim

MM Online - Anwar in Port Dickson scrum piques interest (extracts):

Mahathir and Azmin - are they likely to determine Anwar's chances in PD ... I mean 'support', wakakaka

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 29 — Although voter fatigue may be settling in after three by-elections since the May 9 general election, analysts said the crowded Port Dickson race featuring Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim may turn out interesting.

PAS is fielding a military veteran in the the Port Dickson by-election that will also be contested by former Negri Sembilan Mentri Besar Tan Sri Isa Samad as an independent, former Anwar aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, Parti Rakyat Malaysia, and independent Stevie Chan.

FMT - I’m the victim not Anwar, Saiful tells Mahathir (extracts):

The man at the centre of the sodomy charge against Anwar Ibrahim today questioned Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s about-turn in sympathising with the jailed PKR leader, after the former prime minister joined calls for Anwar’s release. [...]

“In October 2014, Tun Mahathir had expressed his sympathy towards me as a victim when I visited him at his Yayasan Perdana office, with my wife and my newborn son

“How easily one can forgo principles and meaning of justice when it serves a desperate political objective,” Saiful, 32, said in his FB post earlier today [...]

Saiful said Mahathir, who now chairs the four-party Pakatan Harapan coalition, was blinded by “power and ambition” 

“It is definitely the most interesting one out of all four we had since May 9,” Universiti Sains Malaysia analyst Prof Dr Sivamurugan Pandian told Malay Mail.

“In one corner we have a PM-in-waiting, we also have an embattled former mentri besar who doesn’t have any machinery at the moment, a PAS man who is a military veteran and other independent candidates. It is exciting to see how things will pan out.” [...]

With his illustrious political career, Anwar now has his eyes set on the bigger prize. But this does not mean that his rivals are to be treated with contempt.

They are former Umno leader Isa; PAS candidate Lt Col (Rtd) Mohd Nazari Mokhtar, who is a 57-year-old Royal Malaysian Air Force retiree; former PKR Kapar Youth chief Ahmad Kamarudin, who will be representing Parti Rakyat Malaysia; Saiful Bukhari, who was allegedly sodomised by Anwar; and independent candidate Chan, who is a Twitter personality with over 8,000 followers.

Isa Samad 

The October 13 poll will be Anwar’s golden opportunity for a strong political comeback, thus paving his way to succeed Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as the eighth prime minister.

Isa, particularly, is no stranger to politics and Negri Sembilan. He had previously administered the state for 22 years.

In a bold move, the former Umno vice president recently quit the party to face Anwar on his very own homeground.

The title of the MM Online article delightfully uses-includes the word 'scrum' (as in rugby scrum) to appropriately describe the amazing number of independent candidates, apart from PAS and PRM, contesting in the PD by-election.

scrum 

Make you wonder, don't they? Wakakaka.

In my yesterday's post Odds against Anwar Ibrahim in PD? I mentioned 'musuh dalam selimut' but omitted mentioning that included Pakatan, not just PKR. I plain forgot, wakakaka.

I'll be a monkey's uncle if at least two of Anwar's competition in PD aren't "financed" by 'musuh dalam selimut' from both PKR and Pakatan Harapan.

One of them doesn't act on altruistic reason while the other can hardly afford to throw away money on a useless (questionable symbolic) gesture apart from attracting undesired attention on his notoriety, victim or otherwise. The latter's participation is mainly to embarrass Anwar and cost the latter votes - undoubtedly the wish of his 'musuh dalam selimut'.

As I asked in my previous post, how then will Anwar fare in PD? The man pictured below can tell, wakakaka.

and the winner of the PD by-election is ........

wakakaka 

Odds against Anwar Ibrahim in PD?

Malaysiakini - What will happen if Anwar loses in PD? by Zan Azlee (extracts):

I had written in a previous instalment of my column on how the public has the perception that Anwar is just too impatient in wanting to be the prime minister ...

We all know that even before the general election last May, the Pakatan Harapan coalition already had in its plan for Anwar to succeed Dr Mahathir Mohamed as prime minister if they were to win the election. It was one of their campaign promises.

The only problem right now is that many people feel Anwar should just sit tight and wait his turn. This is not the right time for him to start pushing himself into government, the cabinet and eventually the prime ministership. [...]

Civil society has been vocal about this. Stevie Chan @youtiup @tapaimalaya has quite a following on Twitter and regular comments on local politics and social issues. He has decided to run as an independent candidate in PD to send that message to Anwar.

To date, several online surveys have already shown that Chan is leading in the popularity contest against Anwar. Other civil society groups have also expressed concern and displeasure, such as army veterans, and more recently, the “super liberals”.

Of course, everyone acknowledges his struggle and many Malaysians are very thankful for what he has done to bring change. For all those who voted for Harapan, they agree that he needed to be pardoned and released - and which he already has - immediately after Harapan’s win.

Anwar’s struggle ever since he was sacked as deputy prime minister in 1998 has been a long one. Twenty years to be exact. As much as he is a good political leader that has managed to rally the people together, he never could match what Mahathir has done - win the general election.

This is not to say that his struggle has played no role in Harapan finally winning. It definitely played a major role. But after 20 years, maybe his role was just that - to start the wheel rolling, make sure it keeps rolling, and when it has arrived at the destination, his role ends.

Is that it? That Pakatan having achieved majority rule, it should be the end of Anwar's role and his Reformasi in Pakatan?

Thus, is it "Anwar, thank you & fck off"?

I look at Anwar's current dicey by-election in Port Dickson (PD), when by logic it should be a guaranteed win with a huge majority. The possible deviation from a sure win for Anwar is a result of the hostilities of 3 groups who are out to deny, sabotage and fCk him up kaukau one way or another, wakakaka.

These 3 groups are (listed as follows not in any particularly order of severity of their hostility):

(1) pro-Mahathir guppies, to wit, people especially young immature generally clueless brats who fail to realise it was Anwar's 20 years of struggle against Mahathir that have culminated-resulted in Pakatan Rakyat's victories in 2008 and 2013 and as a momentum follow-through, in 2018. Earlier (2008 & to a lesser extent, 2013) t'was only obscene gerrymandering that denied him the government. 

Only Anwar and Anwar alone could have merged PKR, DAP and PAS in a form to frighten the sh*ts out of BN (or more correctly UMNO). He bequeathed that coalition-legacy, the art of working together for ideological foes, thus the 2018 Pakatan was/is a mere consequence of his earlier efforts of doing the impossible, that of bringing ideologically disparate parties together.

Of course timing and circumstances were important and in 2013 to 2018 when political sentiments were becoming overwhelmingly anti-BN rather than pro Pakatan, Mahathir walked gnam gnam into Pakatan and benefited from Anwar's earlier hard yards.

Today these clueless pro Mahathir guppies are propagating smear campaigns against Anwar by highlighting, criticising, condemning and cursing his previous sodomy trials and his alleged sleazy slimy shenanigans, without being aware of how draconian and oppressive their now-beloved Mahathir had been for 22 years and that, ironically, it was a Mahathir's earlier (4th Reich) government that first incarcerated Anwar. The whole world had then condemned Mahathir.

The funny thing or pathetic excuse the guppies have resorted to is an appeal to critics of Mahathir to forget and forgive Mahathir's past scandals, sins and schemes, but strangely (though not so strange after all, wakakaka) not those of Anwar or Najib (wakakaka) or Zaid Ibrahim or Tan Seng Giaw or Lee Lam Thye or anyone, say, like Sangeet Kaur (daughter of Karpal Singh who was against collaborating with Mahathir), wakakaka again, as if the so-called 'sins' of Zaid, TSG or LLT, Sangeet, etc could even be a milli-fraction of those of the Big Bad Boss.

Let me quote what a Malaysiakini reader 'Not convinced' commented in the news portal interactive comment section, as follows:

Indeed, if Anwar critics are willing to accept Mahathir when he was the source of the rot in our institutions, then why not Anwar.

Anwar took the hard road of setting up a multiracial party, unlike Mahathir who belatedly joined the then opposition together with his Malay-only party.

Anwar's detractors are digging up all the things which he had done wrong when he was in Umno. The same, perhaps even more, can be dug up about Mahathir.

I’m willing to accept Mahathir despite his blemished record when he was serving in his first stint as PM. I, too, am willing to accept Anwar as I believe that new Malaysia is about everyone putting shoulder to the wheel.

goofy gullible guppies 

Yes, suck deeply on that, you goofy gullible guppies - what's good for the goose (Mahathir) should by right, logic and fairness be also good for the gander (Anwar).

(2) The second group hostile to Anwar and his prospects in the PD by-election is within PKR itself. I needn't comment on this more than to highlight the presence and reality of Anwar's 'musuh dalam selimut'.

See also FMT - PKR man repeats claims of anti-Anwar sabotage, says Isa part of conspiracy.

There cannot be more than One Tiger on a Mountain, a Chinese saying indicating there can only be One TOP Leader in one realm (be he or she the absolute ruler, President of a republic or PM of Malaysia).

Mind you, there have been dual kingship or Diarchy since ancient times, where the most famous was found in ancient Sparta and ancient Carthage (suffets or elected Judges in the latter).

The dual-Kings of Sparta or Archagetai were selected from two royal lines, the Agiads and Eurypontids who were the descendants of the twins Eurystenes and Procles, great-great-great-grandson of the legendary Heracles (Hercules to Romans). We are told the twins conquered Sparta two generations after the Trojan War.

Sorry I digress again but let's say those Spartans or Carthaginians were not Chinese hence they hadn't heard of 'There cannot be more than One Tiger on a Mountain', wakakaka.

(3) The third group are people like me who have never like Anwar from long ago mainly because of his non-reformasi character when he was in UMNO for a jolly 16 years.

However, in the present circumstance I have forgiven him (as guppies have forgiven Maddy, wakakaka) on two grounds, (a) he has suffered enough for 20 years after his UMNO expulsion and (b) there will be greater danger if someone else in Pakatan were to be selected as the next PM, wakakaka.

How then will Anwar fare in PD? Like Zan Azlee I leave the answer to you, wakakaka.

Hanipa Maidin puts PKR & DAP & Pribumi to shame

FMT - Govt’s right to sue makes free speech meaningless, says deputy minister:

PETALING JAYA: Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Mohamed Hanipa Maidin today joined the chorus of criticism against the recent Federal Court ruling that the government can sue individuals for defamation.

Hanipa, who is deputy minister in charge of law, said the judgment left much to be desired.

“As far as I am concerned, the decision by the English court in Derbyshire is very sound and should deserve our utmost respect,” he told FMT in a text message.

Hanipa, a lawyer by training, added that the English judgment reflected the true nature of law on defamation.

He said the people had the right to comment on their elected government, even if their comments appeared defamatory in nature.

“The government must not be given any right to sue for defamation, period.”

He added that the Federal Court appeared to have failed to differentiate between an ordinary civil suit and an action for libel.

“With the greatest respect, this has made the judgment hard to swallow in any democratic nation. It renders the right to free speech useless and meaningless.”

Adding that the apex court seemed to have taken a literal interpretation of the law, he said this could be seen as a mockery of the law on defamation.

Yesterday, a Federal Court bench chaired by Ahmad Maarop dismissed an appeal by Stampin MP Chong Chien Jen, holding that federal and state governments could sue individuals for defamation.

Ahmad, who delivered the unanimous ruling, said in Malaysia, the right of governments to sue was provided for under Section 3 of the Government Proceedings Act (GPA) 1956.

He said the common law principle based on the 1994 case of Derbyshire was not suitable in Malaysia as there were also restrictions to the right to freedom of speech under the Federal Constitution.

He said Parliament imposed restrictions for defamation and the incitement to any offence.

S Nair

Meanwhile, lawyer SN Nair said Attorney-General Tommy Thomas should advise the government to amend the GPA as the ruling was an anomaly.

“A clause should be inserted in the GPA to state no defamation proceeding can be brought against citizens,” he said.

As a matter of public policy, he said, the government must learn to accept criticism. He added that it could reply to critics through the media and the legislature.

He also warned against the government being seen to use public funds to mount a legal challenge against an individual for expressing his views.

“This is like the servant trying to sue the master as governments are elected by the people to serve them,” he said.

Related:

(1) Federal Court further restricts freedom of expression in "New Malaysia".

In above earlier post, I mentioned that not one single minister of the new Mahathir government has raised any comments on the draconian ruling. I take that back and apologise to YB Hanipa Maidin. Good on you Hanipa.

(2) FMT - Cenbet: Amend GPA to stop governments from suing for defamation.

Federal Court further restricts freedom of expression in "New Malaysia"

The greatest obscenity of all must surely be a government figure (whether minister, government institution or public servant) using public-taxpayers' money to sue a member of the public for criticising actions of the government.

It's not unlike the scion of a wealthy man suing his sire, the fount of his (scion's) wealth, or that of a poor mum being shouted at by his teenage child.

And that's what has happened when the Apex Court rules Federal Court rules gov't can sue for defamation.

The Federal Court in its ruling says: The government has a reputation, the court said, which it could protect via defamation suits.

Judge Ahmad Maarop as chair of the 5-person bench, delivered the unanimous ruling of the Federal Court, said: ... in Malaysia the right of federal and state governments to sue was provided for under Section 3 of the Government Proceedings Act 1956.

He said the common law principle based on a case in Britain in the 1990s was not suitable in Malaysia, as the right to freedom of speech under the Federal Constitution also imposed restrictions.He said Parliament imposed restrictions for defamation and the incitement to any offence.

But Sri Gopal Ram Sri Ram said ... the Government Proceedings Act was a pre-Merdeka statute.

“Therefore it cannot be treated as imposing a restriction on the right of free speech under Article (10) (2) of the Federal Constitution,” he said.

Being a pre-Merdeka law, it must be brought into accord with Article 162 (6) of the constitution, the supreme law of the country, he said.

“When we do that, the right of the government to sue must be subject to Article (10) (1) (a) which will include the right to criticise the government without restriction,” he said.

Sri Ram said under Article 5 (1), the personal liberty of a person could not be taken away save in accordance with law.

“The law included common law of England. Under that law, a government has no reputation to protect,” he added.

Sri Ram further said the right to sue must be accompanied by a cause of action.

However, he said the Government Proceedings Act only stated governments could sue as an ordinary person but the law must vest a cause of action.

He said the common law prevented the government to bring an action for defamation.

In the Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others (1993) case, the British Appeals Court ruled:

... it was of the highest public importance that a democratically elected governmental body should be open to uninhibited public criticism, and since the threat of civil actions for defamation would place an undesirable fetter on the freedom to express such criticism, it would be contrary to the public interest for institutions of central or local government to have any right at common law to maintain an action for damages for defamation; and that, accordingly, the plaintiff was not entitled to bring an action for libel against the defendants, and its statement of claim would be struck out.

government with taxpayers' money can sue you to financial ruins 

What our Federal Court has sadly done is to FURTHER restrict freedom of expression in the so-called "New Malaysia".

Even more sadly, not one single minister of the new Mahathir government has raised any comments on the draconian ruling. Pariahs.

not even vaccinated for anti-rabies