Press Statement By DAP Secretary-General And MP For Bagan Lim Guan Eng In Kuala Lumpur On 28.10.2014.
Double-Standards And Selective Prosecution Of The Attorney-General Chambers (AGC) In Refusing To Charge Ibrahim Ali, For His Inflammatory Calls To Burn Malay And Iban Copies Of The Bible With The Word “Allah”, Which Is No Different From Behaving Like A Defence Counsel For Ibrahim Ali, All Due To Cabinet’s Tacit Approval And Indifference Towards The Rights Of Non-Muslims.
The double-standards and selective prosecution of the Attorney-General Chambers (AGC) in refusing to charge Perkasa President Ibrahim Ali, for his inflammatory calls to burn Malay and Iban copies of the Bible with the word “Allah”, which is no different from behaving like a defence counsel for Ibrahim Ali, is all due to cabinet’s tacit approval and indifference towards the rights of non-Muslims. Even though several Cabinet members have individually opined that Ibrahim Ali should be charged for trampling with impunity over the sensitivities of Christians, they have all passively submitted to Cabinet’s decision to fully endorse the AGC’s decision to let Ibrahim Ali escaped unpunished.
This is highlighted by de facto Minister of Law Nancy Shukri who merely “read out” her written answer to my question in Parliament justifying that Ibrahim Ali would not be charged because he was merely defending Islam. Worse she compounded that error of an answer with an even worse grievous error by stating that this is in line with the Federal Constitution. So far Nancy Shukri has still not explained where in the Federal Constitution or in the Holy Quran, is stated that burning Bibles is justifiable to defend Islam.
The AGC’s explanation yesterday that Ibrahim’s call for Bibles to be burned must be viewed in its entire context, adding that the Perkasa chief’s statement was aimed at the Bibles distributed to Muslim students of SMK Jelutong in Penang, is wholly ridiculous. Where is it stated under sedition laws that an exception can be made for a statement made with seditious tendencies merely because of the context it was viewed?
When I was convicted and imprisoned for 18 months under the Sedition Act in 1998 for defending a minor who was raped but “imprisoned” whilst her rapists escaped scot-free, even speaking out the truth is no defence against the sedition charge so long as a seditious tendency can be proved. DAP does not approve of sedition laws but if the government wants to apply it, they must apply it fairly and impartially. Practicing double-standards like in Ibrahim’s case clearly shows that the sedition law is a weapon of mass destruction against BNs political opponents.
The AGC stressed that when studied in its entire context, Ibrahim’s statement is not categorised as having seditious tendencies because it was clear that Ibrahim Ali had no intention to create religious tensions, but was only defending the purity of Islam. Why then was I still convicted when I showed that my intention was to defend the purity of justice? The AGC should charge Ibrahim Ali and let the courts decide.
The AGC also confirmed that the Bibles were distributed outside the school in Jelutong, Penang last year, but said it had decided to close the case because there was no proof that the religious texts were meant for Malay students alone. What is even more incomprehensible was that the distribution of the Bibles that caused Ibrahim Ali to call for it to be burned, was not in Bahasa Malaysia nor in Iban but in English and did not contain the word Allah.
Clearly the AGC is engaging in sheer nonsense by claiming that the faith of Muslim students is at stake when Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem and Sarawak Governor Tun Abdul Taib Mahmud attended Christian missionary schools without having their faith shaken nor were there any recorded cases of missionary schools attempting to convert their Muslim students.
LIM GUAN ENG
— CN Version —