Mr. Prime Minister, Review Section 114A or You will lose Votes


August 14, 2012

Mr. Prime Minister, Review Section 114A or You will lose Votes

by The Malaysian Insider

Datuk Seri Najib Razak said tonight Putrajaya will discuss the controversial amendment to the Evidence Act after much of Malaysian cyberspace blacked out to protest the law that threatens freedom of expression on the Internet.

The Prime Minister’s comment came after at least three Barisan Nasional (BN) lawmakers called for a review of Section 114A of the law, which presumes guilt and responsibility for comments made online.

“I have asked Cabinet to discuss Section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950. Whatever we do we must put people first,” Najib posted in his Twitter microblogging site tonight.

Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah (left), UMNO Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, and MCA Senator Gan Ping Sieu added their backing to a growing chorus of protest against the new law.

The campaign against the new law that threatens to curtail freedom of expression online here has widened with more organisations promising to take down their websites in the Internet Blackout Day tomorrow.

The Centre for Independent Journalism Malaysia (CIJ) said the Bar Council has confirmed they will be taking down their website to support this while the DAP is also shutting down all its websites on August 14.

Tech-savvy DAP leader Lim Kit Siang and human rights lawyer Edmund Bon have pledged to go offline for 24 hours while others will support a pop-up to promote the Stop 114A campaign. They include Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir, Hishamuddin Rais (Tukar Tiub), Uppercaise, Nat Tan, Niki Cheong, Anil Netto, Juana Jaafar, Sarawak Bloggers, Fahmi Fadzil, Din Merican, and myasylum.

The new law was passed by the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara in April this year and was gazetted on  July 31 by de facto Law Minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz.

18 thoughts on “Mr. Prime Minister, Review Section 114A or You will lose Votes

  1. It’s not gonna happen folks ! It is like asking Najib Razak to expose his ass so Bendover Singh could work on it. Forget about it !
    _____________
    I will give him the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, his best democracy in the world is just crap.–Din Merican

  2. The best hope is that they will not implement or implement only when absolutely necessary. Over here many laws are not enforced but remain on the books. One example is the anti-sodomy law. Yes, some states still have anti-sodomy laws on their books. You don’t think a country like the U.S. morally decadent and all have laws like that still? Well, you’re wrong.

  3. will give him the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, his best democracy in the world is just crap.– Din Merican

    He is likely to come up with a promise of an amended version in the run-up to the elections. If that is what you mean I’m with you.

  4. Is it not always the case in Bolehland? Guilty until proven innocent?
    ________
    Be,

    You can call this “belakang main” approach to law making. Only in Malaysia.–Din Merican

  5. Dato Din

    I thought you said NO POSTING on 14 August in support of Internet Blackout Day. What happened???
    ________________
    Only postings relating to Internet Black Out and Section 114A only. Normal posting will resume in 15 minutes.–Din Merican

  6. A woman is entitled to change her mind, why can’t Dato??- Mr Bean

    I want to make sure that the bloghost is not accused of “cakap tak serupa bikin”.

    A woman changing her mind from Yes to NO can result in you caught in a rape case. Even from NO to YES can be dangerous because half-way through, she might turn it around from YES to NO.Such entitlement should be made illegal.
    ______________
    I suppose, Frank, women want to have their cake and eat it. –Din Merican

  7. Be careful at the keys you tap , be mindful of what you caress…114A and unatural sex , whats the penal code for the latter… Gosh! Now everyone is guilty of something…

  8. “A woman changing her mind from Yes to NO can result in you caught in a rape case. Even from NO to YES can be dangerous because half-way through, she might turn it around from YES to NO.” ol’ frank

    As an undergrad studying economics, we were acquainted with the need for double coincidence of wants by Joghinder Singh – you’ll remember him. As undergrad studying law we were told that for there to be a crime the ‘actus reus’ of the crime and ‘mens rea’ must coincide.

    If you penetrated a woman (the actus reus of the alleged crime) without the mens rea of rape i.e. believing you had her consent, and you did, it is not rape. If when you first penetrated her you had her consent but half way she withdrew her consent must you withdraw first and penetrate again this time without her consent before there could be rape?

    The judge in that case said there was no need to be concerned with technicalities. Rape is rape.

  9. A more difficult situation normally arises when a woman says no but means yes – which always almost is the case. In that case we will never know if she wants more or wants less – or wants you stop.

  10. A more difficult situation normally arises when a woman says no but means yes – Mr Bean

    Then stay on the side of caution by NOT taking NIKE’s advice… Just don’t do it!! In that perspiring situation, go to the bathroom alone and……

  11. If when you first penetrated her you had her consent but half way she withdrew her consent must you withdraw first and penetrate again this time without her consent before there could be rape?- Mr Bean

    Its your word against hers. Unless you tell her, “I would like to record your consent on this tape recorder.” Better still, tell her . “I would like to video tape this glorious occasion”. You make sure she is your wife because it can go to YouTube.

  12. Remember. Rape is sexual penetration without consent. Just a tiny fraction will do. Burglary is breaking an entry. Just a toe in the doorway would do for there to be a break-in.

  13. I thought if a lady says “no” she means maybe; if she says “maybe” she means yes. And if she says “yes”, she’s no lady.

  14. “Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah (left), UMNO Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, and MCA Senator Gan Ping Sieu added their backing to a growing chorus of protest against the new law.”

    So the first 2 who voted for it (ok, I just assume they did) in the first place now oppose to it? And did the 3rd oppose to it in Dewan Negara? Or they were all sleeping in the dewan-dewan?

  15. I don’t get it. Why is this amendment here in the first place? Who’s brilliant idea was it to have this? The fact that it passed the Dewan Rakyat is sickening.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s