‘De-citizenise’ the HINDRAF leaders, is constitutional

The withdrawal of the charge ‘attempting murder of a policeman in duty’ against the “HINDRAF 31”, which lead to the acquittal of these 31 suspects on Monday, 17 December 2007 at the Shah Alam Sessions Court was really shameful and disgrace to the Attorney General’s Chambers. This decision was made almost immediately after 13 ethnic Indian NGOs and defacto Indian community leader and MIC President Dato’ Seri S. Samy Vellu met the ‘Flip-Flop’ Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi late last week.

Some people actually thought the charge of ‘attempting murder on a policeman’ was overkill, despite a life of a policeman on duty, to maintain order and public safety was grievously threatened by a mob of 31 people. Enough to allow some really opportunistically-bankrupt-dinosaur-relic politician to demand that the Attorney General to apologise to the ‘HINDRAF 31’, despite that they were initially denied bail for the severity of the charge then ‘conveniently’ let of the hook with lightning speed because the ‘Flip-Flop’ Prime Minister ‘compassionately’ intervened into the legal process. This arrogantly ungrateful call shoul be seen as ‘adding insult to injury’.

Taken from Malaysia-Today.net:


Gani owes public apology to Batu Caves 31 for travesty of justice


Posted by Raja Petra

Tuesday, 18 December 2007

Gani owes the Batu Caves 31 unjustly incarcerated for 13 days – a total of 403 days – and their families a public apology.The Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail owes the Batu Caves 31 who were unjustly incarcerated for 13 days and their families a public apology for the sufferings and hardships they should not have been made to go through.Gani’s explanations why he dropped the charges of attempted murder against the Batu Caves 31 in the Shah Alam Sessions Court underline the grave injustice which the Attorney-General had caused the 31 with the ridiculous charge of attempted murder and collective punishment of the 31 with the denial of bail for 13 days, resulting in a number of victims losing their jobs.Two reasons had been given by Gani.Gani said: “We can’t pinpoint who exactly did it or rather who was the one who threw the brick at the person who was badly injured”. If so, why did he charge the 31 with the capital offence of “attempted murder” with the maximum sentence of 20 years’ jail and fine, and what’s worse, denying bail to them for 13 days on a completely baseless contention of their being threats to national security!Secondly, Gani said the 31 men were initially charged not because they were alleged to be Hindraf members but because they had committed an offence by participating in an illegal assembly.Gani said all the 31 men had signed letters opposing Hindraf and claimed they were not Hindraf members. They also said they would never take part in any illegal assembly in the future.This is a very serious contradiction. If the 31 were not charged because they were Hindraf members, why should any subsequent claim that they were not Hindraf members have any bearing on their cases?The Batu Caves 31 had already been harshly and unfairly punished although they were innocent of the charge of attempted murder, as they were all incarcerated for 13 days each, which work out to 403 days for jail sentence for the 31.The least Gani should do is to tender a public apology to the Batu Caves 31 and their families for this travesty of justice and abuse of prosecutorial powers in his unfair and unjust handling of cases of the Batu Caves 31.Lim Kit Siang

On the other hand, some other people thought that the HINDRAF leaders and active supporters were likened as ‘extremist militants’, equivalent to Al Maunah, KMM and Communist Terrorists and should be dealt severely. Some UMNO leaders vehemently asked the Government and authorities to deal with these people stern and decisively. One even charged them with guilt of ‘high treason’.

Almost two weeks ago, 397 NGOs from all the major ethnic groups, interests and level of the Malaysian society converged and adopted a resolution for the Government to seriously consider.

Despite warnings and threats of arrest and after 18 days of allowing the HINDRAF leaders to go around making more incriminating statements and defying provisions of the law and societal norms on maintaining harmony and good inter-racial relations, last Thursday five HINDRAF leaders were arrested under ISA laws. This were received with relieved by many and dismay by some.


Having said all that, there are people who felt that not only the HINDRAF leaders and active supporters could be charged, tried and eventually found guilty of ‘extremist militanism’, seditions and high treason, but guilty of unbecoming the citizen of Malaysia and be stripped of the citizenship to this country. This is provided by the Constitution of the Federation of Malaysia, Article 25 (1) A which read:

Article 25

  1. (1) The Federal Government may by order deprive of his citizenship any person who is a citizen by registration under Article 16A or 17 or a citizen by naturalisation if satisfied –
    • (a) that he has shown himself by act or speech to be disloyal or disaffected towards the Federation;

Clearly, HINDRAF leaders, especially the five-plus-one, committed enough grounds for the warrant to be stripped of their Malaysian citizenship. In his letter to the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on 15 November 2007, HINDRAF leader P. Uthayakumar urged that Malaysia’s membership in the Commonwealth be suspended, if not expelled for blatant lies and malicious fabricated information about Malaysian Indian ethnic being systematically and structurally put through the “ethnic cleansing” process the last fifty years. Of course, the HINDRAF primary objective was to stir up the anger of the Indian ethnic group, worldwide. Then it was the piece that was featured as the front page in a Singapore daily that violence is imminent, in the HINDRAF roll-out plan. That is not including statements made whilst abroad, including in the UK and India, where it almost caused a diplomatic row.


These attempts are nothing less that of as per stated as “…he (they has (have) shown himself (themselves) by act or speech, to be disloyal or disaffect towards the Federation”.

This opportunity would be the perfect ‘consolation’, if not ‘redemption’ for the overwhelmingly disgraceful and intolerable “cock-up” by the ‘Flip-Flop’ Prime Minister Abdullah via Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail. Failure to act against these persons who have committed “crimes of disloyal towards the Federation”, especially when one is provided with the law to do so, shall be deemed as collaborating with the said criminals too. Therefore, one should be subjected to be de-citizenise too, as provided by Article 25 (1) A of the Constitution of the Federation.

Published in: on December 19, 2007 at 07:04  Comments (43)