==> Pls visit new site at http://malaysia-today.net/ <==

By Sonia Randhawa (The Nut Graph)

A cursory glance through the major cases over the last 30 years reveals one common thread. Not one of them has advocated the violent overthrow of the state. Instead, they have all criticised individuals in 
government or government policies or the actions of the component political parties. However, this, to a large extent, is the function of opposition political parties and the media: to act as a check to executive power.

The rationale for any sedition act is to protect the state from violent overthrow. But across the world, democracies have been slowly dismantling their legislation on sedition. And in countries such as Australia where legislatures have enacted new provisions restricting sedition to inciting the state's violent overthrow, these haven't even been used.

Read more at: http://www.thenutgraph.com/arbitrariness-of-sedition-act

Comments (2)

...
written by Sagaladoola, May 12, 2009 09:37:30

Yayyy ... I like all of them .. not because of the Sedition Act though

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 1

...
written by Kaneeneh, May 12, 2009 12:14:03

We can imagine a bunch of BN goons in Kamunting once PR takes over. They're going to be upset and loud.

report abuse

disagree 0

agree 0