The Candlelight Vigil, the Rights under the Constitution, the Transgression of the Fundamental Rights and the Arrest...

Avoiding it I tried but can't help the fact that it is just there to laugh at. I realised it is not a matter to be laughed at but it is just funny in its own way. I'm talking about the candlelight vigil and the action of the OCPD Head Hunter (as his T-Shirt says so) instructing the arrest of the group (which I think harmless) together with the lawyers who purportedly went there to help some of them.

 

If you have the chance to visit Youtube, just search for “candlelight vigil arrest” and you’ll come to a clip about seven minutes long showing what pieces of what had happened that day. Well, it is not D-Day but just have a look and try to understand what had happened.

 

The first funny act to me was the action of the OCPD (who probably is saying the only provision in the Police Act that he knows) asking the people to disperse and the way the warning was given was hilarious. Should see the way he shouted and dear sir, what is the hailer for? The group was not even near a big group and even a whisper can be heard between them. But I guess to show control and power, one must have a hailer or must be on the horn…

 

Call it what you may, when the arrest was made, it was somewhat a clear transgression of the fundamental liberties, breach of the civil rights, an act against the right stated in the Federal Constitution or a wrong against the Federal Constitution, the police (not that I’m approving what the police did to the people) has acted with the strong belief (I supposed so) that the group will become out of control (which I don’t personally think so as how much damage a person holding a candle “peacefully” can do? Of course unless they go and burn the police station and that will already be an act of arson which is a crime under the Penal Code).

 

By making the arrest, a serious breach of the fundamental liberties has occurred and truly, the police have not acted in accordance with the rules and regulation at that particular time, so to speak and action need to be taken to remedy the act of foolishness of the police when the arrest was made. Probably a legal course was needed to remedy that and we’ll send the OCPD first as officer in the police force should not be perceived to be acting stupid in the people’s eyes. I’m not saying his is stupid but I’m saying he is acting stupid because he did not take into consideration all relevant laws when he ordered the arrest.

 

Then, the police go and arrest the lawyers who went there as well to help the detainees triggering a bigger mass of nearly 2,000 lawyer in PJ at an EGM approving among others, the call for the resignation of the Home Minister and also the Inspector General of the Police. Well, I did not vote for the passing of the resolutions and I think it is a lost cause and let the politician do the politicking. Somehow or rather the lawyers here in Malaysia has been at par with their counterparts in India and Pakistan for reasons I do not know. Probably some of the lawyers think, well why not we try to champion several things and probably some of us get “Datukship” from some Head of States.

 

Having said all that, since some parties are preaching freedom of speech and fundamental rights and I’m allowed to have my two cents worth of opinion, in my opinion, there will be no transgression of whatever, if first of all, there was no candlelight vigil. What can be achieved anyway? Show support to this Wong guy? Show support by collecting money and get the best lawyer in town to get him free not by holding candles… There will be no arrest and probably only some of the people will know this “OCPD Head Hunter” guy if the candlelight vigil does not take place.

 

Unlike the “Perhimpunan Bersih” in 2007, the candlelight vigil, out of the 27 million Malaysian, less than 1000 people participated. The weight of the procession was dwarfed by the presence of the policemen that night. I think there is more policemen to arrest those involved and then we complain that our police did not do their work. Let me ask you this. How are they supposed to do their work when 200 of them are supposed to be present at those holding candle lights?

 

My opinion may not be the most popular opinion among the idealist who reads “Austin” or “Mil” or some other dead guys who think what and how people should be regulated and called themselves philosopher but practically, in handling mankind, no man has the right to tell others how to bind another man and of course unless it is DIVINE (I hated jurisprudence back in law school and I think it is a waste of time studying what dead people says). So, the OCPD, purportedly acting under the Section 27 of the Police Act was right when he made that order to arrest because to him, it made him stayed at the police station for no particular reason. Extra headache to overcome.

 

I think if I were given the same situation, I would do the same and giving him the benefit, he did give warning using his “horn” for the people to disperse. I saw giving three warning and three minutes for the group to disperse and also saw him counting until ten on the last warning on Youtube. And believe me, if I were the lawyer for the government, I would say that by not dispersing, it tantamount to an act of provocation. Thus, the “OCPD Head Hunter” has the right to make the order to arrest.

 

I am not taking side here because to me, all of that can be avoided. Probably it is my training as a corporate lawyer has enabled me to pre-empt everything that comes into my way. So the equation would go something like this. No candlelight vigil, no arrest, no arrest, no “perhimpunan tanpa permit”, thus no arrest of the young lawyers. The Malaysian Bar need not jump up and down because 5 of their lawyers were arrested. If you choose to be an activist, then, the consequences are foreseeable. Look at Gandhi and Mandela (I like this part because some illegal MB claim that he is as same as the two).

 

Am I right to say that?  I think I am. If you think being arrested is something you couldn’t bear, then come join me and we possibly make our country more prosper. We play golf once or twice a week. We look into those who are in need without having to tell other people that we care (at least that’s what Islam preach us to do under the principle called “Ihsan”). If all of us are trying to be idealistic, then, who is working on the economy? And during the time like this, I think working on reviving the economy is far greater than being idealistic promulgating on the fundamental rights.

 

Think of this… in some countries in this world, breaching the fundamental rights are virtue and that’ll make their people to be able to get a plate of their staple food (rice in our country) and luckily live longer. Finally, for those who forgets, Article 5 (1) of the Federal Constitution says, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.” Thus, the rights given is not unlimited and we have laws to adhere to and of course the Police Act. We should look at the rights given to us in the true sense and in the spirit of which the Federal Constitution was written and NOT THE WAY YOU FEEL IT SHOULD BE.

Race with no ending

Let me give you a scenario. There was a race, one won and the other was defeated one way to another. But after some turn of events, one says he’s the winner. The other went to the umpire complaining that the one is not the true winner since the other one was not disqualified or cheated in the race.

 

The immediate umpire ruled that the other one is still the winner and was always the winner and of course, as expected, the one went to the next umpire to complain and say the ruling made by the immediate umpire was not to be carried out until his argument was heard by the next umpire. The next umpire says, well we have to hear this and we agree that the immediate umpire ruling was not to be carried out until we hear the one.

 

The one went and tell the whole world that the next umpire has declared him as the winner even though the next umpire only declares that it is just a postponement of the ruling made by the immediate umpire. It is not however to be construed as the declaration of the one as winner.

 

All in all, to sum up, the next umpire’s declaration of postponement is just to allow the one to prepare his argument for the next umpire to hear and not to declare him as the winner.