PALOH DAP campaign worker S. Murugan was arrested and charged under the Sedition Act 1948 for sharing a video on Facebook that asked voters not to vote for MIC in the recently held Johor state election.
I understand that MIC members lodged about 12 police reports against Murugan.
I also understand that Murugan merely shared the video – he did not create the video but rather, the 15-second clip was from another individual’s TikTok account.
I happen to have seen the post which used crude language in Tamil to ask voters to reject MIC.
Such a post was not necessary as MIC without the assistance of UMNO would not have won any seats.
In fact, the presence of MIC is a sad reminder of the exploitation and marginalisation of Indians in the country – it is already in the midst of a slow and inexorable demise.
It is a well-known fact that in hotly contested elections it has become a norm for contestants to use offensive language to undermine one another.
MIC is not a saintly party – its leaders have been known to have used crude and offensive language against their opponents and vice versa but attacks and counterattacks like these are common during election campaigns.
While offended parties have the right to lodge police reports, the police must exercise care and caution in investigating the reports.
They should not work on the premise that more the reports, the more the serious nature of the crime.
Recently, it has come to my attention that attacks against non-Muslim religions have become common but despite hundreds of police reports there are no action coming from the police.
However, when reports are made about individuals saying negative things about a majoritarian religion, the police are quick to investigate.
In the case of the single mother Loh Siew Hong, there were irresponsible attacks against some DAP leaders including me for assisting Loh to be reunited with her children.
Despite numerous police reports the police have yet to call in those who were responsible for the racial and religious attacks against the DAP leaders.
However, when reports were made against me on certain allegations, I was called to Bukit Aman for my statement to be taken.
The given impression in the country is that the police have their own methodology in why some reports are taken seriously and others are not.
In this respect, members of the opposition are more prone to be investigated rather than those who are identified as having links with those in power and authority.
In the case of Murugan, since he was not the person responsible for the post, it was not necessary for the police to remand him and charge him under the Sedition Act 1948.
He simply shared the post; he was not the creator of the post and if the post is deemed offensive, the police should go after the real culprit.
Back in the heyday when MIC was under Tun S. Samy Vellu the party was given a terrible lashing and a “funeral” was even organised for him.
Unfortunately, no action was ever taken by the police despite numerous police reports made.
I don’t underestimate the difficulty faced by the police force in ensuring law and order especially in a multiracial and multireligious country such as Malaysia.
However, the impulse on the part of the police to act on behest of those in power must be tempered by larger concerns of fairness and justice.
After all, the facts pertaining to police reports are more important than innate prejudices about crime and those who are responsible. – April 14, 2022
Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy is the state assemblyperson for Perai. He is also deputy chief minister II of Penang.
The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.
Main photo credit: Malaysiakini
