Who is in charge now?

The cabinet has decided that Section 114A is to stay.

This is despite the fact that power that be as high as the Prime Minister has mentioned publicly that it needs to be reviewed.

In the Malaysian tradition once the Prime Minster has publicly stated that that Section needs to be reviewed, it is really rare to see the whole cabinet of which PM is the head coming to a decision that runs counter to the PM’s.

Reading between the lines, it shows how precarious the PM’s own position is, and that vultures are ready to pounce on him if he does not deliver a better result the next GE. It makes me wonder who is really in charge of the country now.

I wrote about this section on 20th June and I paraphrase a part of it here:

The new Evidence Act is a killer. It is meant to stifle freedom of expression on the net. It is something akin to some criminals, who committed a crime in your house, and while the criminals escape, you as the owner of the house is being held responsible.

Say someone came in and robbed patients sitting in my waiting room. while the robber got away, I would be held as responsible for the robbery happening onthem. It is ridiculous, and no one would agree to that. Extrapolate this to the Evidence Act, and it is actually the same thing. 

It is like  a person  visiting a high rise building and throwing a flower pot down to kill someone, and then the person who is now held responsible is the owner of that building.  It is like you go to  a coffee shop, borrow the phone and call someone to threaten him, and then the police will haul up the owner of the coffee shop as the person who should be held responsible.

It is like a person who  visits  a minister’s house during a open house and then uses his phone to send a derogatory sms and then the person being held responsible would be the owner of that house, the minister ( In most likelihood, this minister would not be held responsible  since that is also a Malaysian tradition).

It is really against the principle of fairness. It also makes police work much easier. It is  pronouncing guilt on the owner and he has to prove beyond doubt that he is innocent.

It is guilty until proven innocent.

And to prove innocent, the owner will probably has to hire his own investigative team to track the real culprit.

This is really agianst common sense too.

Advertisements

11 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Wood
    Aug 18, 2012 @ 12:55:31

    It it nothing surprising in BolehLand. One set of rules for the elite and one set for the Rakyat. The Evidence Act is obviously for those who ‘speak’ against the government. Just look at Utusan/Utushit and Perkasa, they can write or speak anything racist and get away with. If you or me write the same thing, you know what will happen????

    Like

  2. CYC
    Aug 18, 2012 @ 17:28:42

    Why do we need somebody in charge when we have reach the state of auto pilot. A sign of maturity in terms of innovation and technology advancement. Anyway, in the spirit of forgiveness during Aidil Fitri festival, lets pray that our country will find its destination of peace and freedom.

    Like

  3. MMC
    Aug 18, 2012 @ 20:15:34

    Truly a False Democrat.

    Like

  4. klm
    Aug 19, 2012 @ 17:22:24

    Ah Jib cannot control his cabinet. Heck. He cannot even control his wife. What more can we say about him. He is useless.

    Like

  5. WildCard
    Aug 19, 2012 @ 22:52:21

    Like it or not, this government is elected by the people through the democratic system established by the elected government. It all depends on what Malaysian want! You get want you voted for! In the end,the citizens are in charge,they empowered the government.

    Like

  6. Li Li Fa
    Aug 20, 2012 @ 13:20:03

    The time has come. It is a clear sign that the ruling regime is having difficulty in arriving at any decision. If arrived; whose decision?

    Not surprising that something extraordinary will happen in the ruling regime in days to come.

    Meanwhile the people are waiting expectantly for the impending 13GE.
    I wonder whose decision that will be – in calling for the next GE.

    Like

  7. MMC
    Aug 21, 2012 @ 12:17:16

    mahatir supports hudud now. MCA following suit. must be breaking news. how is Ah Jib Gor going to respond? quiet as usual?

    Like

  8. disgusted
    Aug 22, 2012 @ 00:43:54

    We have reached a point of no return under BN and the future destiny lies in the hands of the voters. Previously under the sleeping leader and now under a gutless one. if the vote continues to back BN, it is clearly doom. The writings are on the wall. Malaysians should wake up, the more the brighter chance of a recovery.

    Like

  9. Ellese
    Aug 25, 2012 @ 16:53:24

    Reblogged this on The right of reply and commented:
    Sometimes I just dont understand why people like to either purposely mislead the public or proud to show ignorance to the world. Take this article in point. Dr Hsu said:
    “The new Evidence Act is a killer. It is meant to stifle freedom of expression on the net. It is something akin to some criminals, who committed a crime in your house, and while the criminals escape, you as the owner of the house is being held responsible.

    Say someone came in and robbed patients sitting in my waiting room. while the robber got away, I would be held as responsible for the robbery happening on them. It is ridiculous, and no one would agree to that. Extrapolate this to the Evidence Act, and it is actually the same thing.”
    What a load of bull this Dr. Hsu. The example is totally ridiculous.
    First, Evidence Act is not a penal act. Theres no crime you can commit under it. It is a procedural act to state who is to prove what and how to prove. Its different from the penal code.
    Secondly the intending section tries to assert a presumption of facts which you can rebut. Thus the AG need not prove but for us to rebut. For example section 114 states:
    “The court may presume—
    (a) that a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is
    either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he
    can account for his possession;”
    So anyone with stolen goods after a theft is presumed be the thief or receive stolen goods. So the accused is then under an obligation to prove its from someone else. Its not a presumption of an offence but a presumption of facts. You still need to meet the mens rea and actus reus ingredients in the penal offences.
    Thirdly, the issue is never about someone who came to dr hsu’ clinic and then robbing others and then hold dr hsu accountable. This is misleading whether intentionally or otherwise. The issue is more akin to a robber being expressly allowed to enter the clinic by Dr Hsu and then rob the patient. Say dr hsu employs a criminal knowingly and the employee commits the crime or worse dr hsu gains benefit from it. In this case why shouldn’t dr hsu be held responsible?
    Similarly in this case. If the blog owner or administrator allows a criminal act on his blog why shouldn’t he be held accountable? He can delete it but if he choses to publish it then ipso facto he have partaken in the crime.
    So this is the whole issue. Its not what Dr hsu says. That to me that is pure bull. The issue we need to answer is whether its possible for AG to prove that crime? If they can, then the onus must be on them to prove. But if they cant, we as malaysians should not support a criminal act going unpunished. In such a case we then need the presumption like the 114A just like the case of theft under section 114. The next issue is how wide it should be? We want people like starbucks etc to provide free internet. Man, I need it. And a law discouraging this is to me clearly beyond that is required. Perhaps we should introduce some safeguards for example requiring the like of starbucks to at least ask the users to register to prevent abuse. These are things we need to consider. You decide where the balance should lie. We can debate.

    Like

  10. monsterball
    Aug 27, 2012 @ 11:34:03

    Ellese is back to find faults….to insult Dr. Hsu..
    This lawyer burok wants to debate.
    No one cares..all ignoring “her”.
    Look at her twistings… in favor of the Act.
    She is like a rat…smelling opportunity to steal limelight…here she is.
    Lets enjoy her nonsense as we are enjoying Mahathir’s nonsensical stuffs.

    Like

  11. Ellese
    Aug 28, 2012 @ 06:14:07

    I was surprised my comment was allowed back after being banned summarily. So I wish to put on record my thanks to dr hsu. But I’ve moved on and most likely issue my comments from my blog which i had planned not to practice arbitrary censorship like all pr bloggers. For those uninitiated, the comments above are actually part of my blog as well.
    On monsterball comment, as usual there’s absolutely no substance. It will only end up in name calling. Rather than degrading docs blogs like last time and lead me to being banned unjustifiably, if he wants to rant he can do it at my blog. I’ll always reply in kind. Disdain with disdain. Scorn with scorn.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: