AG stands his ground on Perkasa chief

PUTRAJAYA: Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail (pix) continued to fend off criticism on his refusal to prosecute Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali for his "burn Bible" remark, reiterating that the latter was merely defending Islam.
Abdul Gani said although intention need not be proven under the Sedition Act, he said court judgments in past cases serve as a precedent that the context in which the speech is made is important.
"To understand whether this statement was seditious or not, we must look at the full statement he made as well as the context in which it was made," he said in his keynote address at the Law and Judicial Training Institute (ILKAP) National Law Convention at the Putrajaya International Convention Centre today.
Abdul Gani was referring to the case of Public Prosecutor v Ooi Kee Saik in 1971 where the late Perak ruler, Sultan Azlan Shah, who was then the presiding judge, ruled that Ooi had not uttered seditious statements as his speech when read in full is merely criticism against government policy.
He said Ibrahim had clarified that his statement was made in reaction to police reports claiming that Bibles were distributed to SMK Jelutong students, including Muslims, on Jan 17, 2013.
Furthermore, Ibrahim had also said the remarks were not directed at all Bibles but only those containing the word "Allah" and other Jawi scripts that were being distributed to Muslim students.
Abdul Gani said the missionaries distributing Bibles outside the school were similarly not prosecuted because investigations found that they did not break any law based on the evidence submitted.
He said if the government is to charge people based on police reports alone, then 90% of the population would have been hauled to court, including many judges and politicians.
When met outside the convention hall during a short break, Bar Council Human Rights Committee chairman Andrew Khoo said he disagreed with Abdul Gani's assertion that there were no grounds for Ibrahim to be charged with sedition.
"The Malaysian Bar in principle is against the Sedition Act, we support freedom of speech and do not want anybody to be prosecuted for it.
"Having said that, I have to respectfully disagree with the learned Attorney-General on why he felt that there were no grounds to prosecute Ibrahim under the Sedition Act," Khoo said.
He also noted that the case example Abdul Gani quoted to justify the non-prosecution is irrelevant as the case concerns criticism against the government and is not about religious hate speech.