 |
| Did Steven Sim lied to the Malaysian public? |
Stop lying to Malaysians. If you want to oppose laws such as the WPA (and many others) then in a democracy you are free to do so. But stop telling Malaysians that the law gives The Edgeprotection when it clearly does not. The law says that if you disclose instead of reporting a crime you are NOT a whistleblower and would, in fact, have committed a crime.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Many people are misleading Malaysians regarding Malaysia’s Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 (WPA). They argue that the media that publishes stolen data should be given protection under the WPA even if the data is stolen
In other words, a crime committed to expose a crime is not a crime (and data theft is a serious crime in many countries all over the world).
The WPA says that whistleblowers can provide evidence if it is legally available through the course of their work. The catch phrase here is ‘legally available through the course of their work’. That does not cover data theft.
Many articles (such as the one below by Steven Sim) are being published that give Malaysians the wrong information regarding the WPA. Actually, the WPA involves giving protection to someone who lodges a report to any one of seven government agencies.
These seven government agencies are the Royal Malaysian Police, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Royal Malaysian Customs Department, the Immigration Department, the Road Transport Department, the Companies Commission of Malaysia and the Securities Commission.
If you were to report something to any one or more of these seven government agencies and hand over whatever (legally obtained) evidence you may have, you are protected under the WPA.
This was not what The Edge did.
Now, one very important point to note is that disclosure of the confidential information will be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or both.
In other words, if you reveal or publish this information you would be committing a crime whether you did or did not report to one or more of the seven government agencies mentioned above.
The fact that The Edge played the role of whistleblower only three days ago, long after they published the information, means they have forfeited protection under the WPA.
Even if The Edge had published the information after they lodged the report (rather than before like now) they still forfeit their protection under the WPA and would, in fact, have committed a crime.
I have said this before and I will say it again: the law in an ass. But then so are laws that forbid Muslims from drinking or from having extramarital sex or from having anal and oral sex (non-Muslims included).
So go amend those laws. Did the opposition Pakatan Rakyat raise a fuss in 2010 when the WPA was passed by Parliament? Who raised the fuss and when was it? It is no use talking now. And it is even more damaging when you mislead Malaysians by wrongly interpreting what the WPA says.
There is another ‘unpopular’ law, especially amongst Christians, which makes preaching Christianity to Muslims a crime. Can we hear what the opposition has to say about this law as well? Do you want to abolish this law so that Christians can now convert Muslims to Christianity?
Stop lying to Malaysians. If you want to oppose laws such as the WPA (and many others) then in a democracy you are free to do so. But stop telling Malaysians that the law gives The Edge protection when it clearly does not. The law says that if you disclose instead of reporting a crime you are NOT a whistleblower and would, in fact, have committed a crime.
*****************************************
Tony Pua and others should be protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010
Steven Sim, Malay Mail Online
The latest twist in the 1MDB scandal is both mind boggling and atrocious. The tides is turned when whistleblowers such as Tony Pua, MP for Petaling Jaya Utara, Rafizi Ramli, MP for Pandan and Tong Kooi Ong, of the Edge Media Group, were barred from traveling overseas and to Sabah and Sarawak.
A major corruption expose now becomes a plot to topple the federal government?
Instead of going against parties allegedly involved in the multi-billion ringgit corruption scandals which now received intense criticism from no less the Wall Street Journal and even former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the Umno-Barisan Nasional government goes for those who exposed corruption and abuse of power.
I urge the Home Minister to abide by the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 which grants to whistleblowers immunity against civil and criminal action, and protection against detrimental action.
In this case, the action of the government clearly contradicted the provision of the said legislation.
Section 9 of the Act reads:
“…a whistleblower shall not be subject to any civil or criminal liability or any liability arising by way of administrative process, including disciplinary action, and no action, claim or demand may be taken or made against the whistleblower for making a disclosure of improper conduct.”
Section 10 (1) of the Act reads:
“…No person shall take detrimental action against a whistleblower or any person related to or associated with the whistleblower in reprisal for a disclosure of improper conduct.”
Neither the Police Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) nor any enforcement agency has any reasonable excuse to revoke such protection under section 11 of the said Act.
Hence, the government should immediately reverse the travel ban against Pua and others in the same fate as well as apologise to them.
Will Dr Mahathir be next?
By attempting to crush whistleblowers under the might of government machinery, Umno-Barisan Nasional is gagging critics who voiced up against corruption and abuse of power.
Since Dr Mahathir has now become one of the fiercest critics of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the latter’s involvment in the 1MDB scandal, will Dr Mahathir be the next victim of government’s silencing of dissent?
If this is the case, no one is allowed to tell the truth anymore in this country.
No comments:
Post a Comment