But others say that while the Perkasa leader deserves punishment for inciting hatred, calling for the use of the draconian Sedition Act amounts to endorsing it.
“What he says isn’t freedom of speech,” he said. “It’s inciting hatred amongst the Malays against other communities. We need the Sedition Act to be used on people like Ibrahim Ali. Right now the government uses it with double standards.”
The Sedition Act prohibits, among other things, discourse deemed to engender ill will between different races. It has long been the subject of controversy. The government has often been accused of using it to silence dissent and as a weapon against political opponents.
Hata was a senior journalist with the Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia until recently, when he was sacked for critical statements against the paper.
His sentiments were echoed by PKR publicity chief Nik Nazmi Ahmad, who said it was unethical to have “bloggers arrested under the Sedition Act, but not Ibrahim Ali. It’s hypocritical.”
However, Nik Nazmi said he would not support draconian laws, even if used against the likes of Ibrahim. There were other laws he could be charged under for his provocative demeanour, he added.
In the most recent of his controversial statements, Ibrahim called for a jihad against Malaysian Christians, accusing Christian leaders of plotting to install one of their own as prime minister.
Other public figures agreed with Nik Nazmi against the use of the Sedition Act.
Masjalizah Hamzah, who heads the Centre for Independent Journalism, said it would be an endorsement of its previous misapplications.
Fadiah Nadwa of Lawyers for Liberty said there was “sufficient legislation to deal with incitement to hatred without resorting to the Sedition Act.”
Suaram coordinator Hasbeemasputra Abu Bakar said the Sedition Act should be repealed along with other repressive laws.
“But to allow Ibrahim Ali to incite hatred without punishment is tantamount to showing him support,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment