“We can understand if you are still looking for Jho Low. We can understand if you can’t fix the economy within 100 days. With those things, there’s a rationale and we can understand the reasons,” Latheefa, who heads Lawyers for Liberty, told the forum “Law reforms under the new government: Where are we now”, organised in conjunction with the Freedom Film Festival here.
She said it is not acceptable for PH to still keep the Sedition Act.
“Why does it take 100 days?” she asked, in an apparent reference to remarks by deputy home minister Azis Jamman who was criticised for defending the continued use of anti-sedition laws.
“What are you waiting for? You want to research, review and analyse? ‘Let us hear from the police’. ‘Let us hear from the other side’.
“What exactly is the other side you want to hear before you abolish the Sedition Act?” she asked.
She said an argument used by supporters of the present government is that the ministers are new and fresh, and that civil servants are giving them a hard time.
“I am sorry. One hundred days is way too long for a person (under detention) to expect to be freed. It is way too long,” she said at a forum today.
She also criticised those who lodge police reports against their political enemies, saying they were just playing to the gallery.
“Say you lodge a police report against someone you don’t like, such as Lokman Noor Adam,” she said, referring to the Umno Supreme Council member who organised gatherings in support of former prime minister Najib Razak.
“He is not a popular guy. He is from BN and Umno. He is a vile man. We hate him. Let us lodge a police report, because it is popular to do so.
“But is it right? It’s not. Do we actively use criminal defamation against him? No. It does not matter if he is from BN or Umno or PH. You do not use laws we have fought against.”
PH’s election manifesto had promised to abolish repressive laws such as the Sedition Act 1948 within the first 100 days in power.
Home Minister Muhyiddin Yassin said a special committee would look into anti-sedition laws as well as the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, the death penalty, Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, Prevention of Crime Act 1959, Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 and Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015.
Latheefa questioned the about-turn of some government officials who themselves had been punished under the same laws.
“Most of the MPs were victims of these laws. They were arrested and charged. Some had protested against these laws.
“Suddenly you don’t remember these things. Suddenly, you still need to discuss and analyse.”
She said the stand taken by Azis in defending the Sedition Act was similar to the position of the former government who fought attempts to abolish the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA).
She said she could understand if such a statement came from the police “because they are doing what they have been doing for the past 60 years”.
“But what are you doing, as a minister? What is your job?”
“You tell the police that it is wrong (to use the sedition law). You tell them, you cannot use it. You tell them, you can use a moratorium to stop using an Act that we are going to abolish. That can be done.
“But why say that as long as we have not abolished, we have to actively use it?”
Latheefa said the fact that the sedition law is still being used shows the government is not committed to abolishing it.
“When people start attacking, you turn around. You make a U-turn, you say you are misquoted or misunderstood. These excuses have been used too many times.
“We are not here asking for a miracle. But we want that commitment from you,” she added.