KUALA LUMPUR: Umno information chief Tan Sri Annuar Musa today raised the possibility that former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad could be angling for a sedition charge by commenting on the appointment of Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali.
In a statement today, Annuar said Mahathir's blog posting on Wednesday could either be courting a sedition charge, or he might also believe that he was above the law.
Annuar said he was puzzled over Dr Mahathir's real intention behind the posting.
"It could be that he, being a shrewd political strategist that he is, was merely trying to garner sympathy from the public and to mobilise support for his cause to get the PM removed by inciting the authority to act against him, hence garnering sympathy for him as a former prime minister and a former Umno president," he said.
Annuar noted that Dr Mahathir, having been a prime minister for a long time, must have known that his posting was seditious in nature, especially when the Federal government under his management used to very frequently charge people for the same offence.
"But it could also be that Dr Mahathir thinks that him being a former PM and a former Umno president may make him immune from the power of law, hence his boldness in going against the law in his attempt to try to get the PM removed," said Annuar.
Annuar however cautioned that the authorities would still have to act against Dr Mahathir if police reports were lodged against him. Failure to act, he said, would lead to the authorities being perceived as being selective.
Annuar dissected Dr Mahathir's remarks, such as "the improper dismissal of the previous Malaysian AG just before he was expected to bring a charge against the PM" and that "the current AG was appointed by the PM through false representation made to the King".
He said Mahathir, in his own words,had also claimed that "clearly the AG does not want the Swiss AG to know whether the money in the PM's personal accounts comes from 1MDB or not", that "the new AG is not likely to prefer a charge against the PM" and that "he is therefore unlikely to provide the Swiss AG with any evidence which may incriminate his employer".
Annuar believed that Dr Mahathir's allegations led to one goal, which was to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia", an offence under Clause 3 (1) (c) of the Sedition Act 1948.
He said Dr Mahathir's claim that "the current AG was appointed by the PM through false representation made to the King" was also seditious, falling under Section 3 (1) (a) of the Sedition Act 1948, which is "to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government".
Annuar labeled Dr Mahathir's claims as an insult to the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong, as if the King was someone who can be easily deceived by the people.
Annuar also poured scorn on the former PM's claims of improper dismissal of the previous AG and the improper appointment of the current AG.
"(These claims) are laughable at best, coming from someone who has been put on record, among others in Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim's PhD thesis entitled "The Rule of Law and Executive Power in Malaysia: A Study of Executive Supremacy" (University of London, 1994), as having improperly sacked the then Chief Justice, Tun Salleh Abas, and his fellow Federal Court Justices, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawanteh and Datuk George Seah, from their posts in 1988 in order to save his posts," he said.
Annuar said that Dr Mahathir, as someone who had "ruined" the Malaysian judicial and legal system during his time, now has no moral standing to preach or complain about it.
"If there's any fault with the current system, he shall blame himself for it as it was him who made and perpetuated it," he said.
He noted that Dr Mahathir improperly dismissing people from their posts, or instructing people to act in certain ways, did not necessarily mean that others would also repeat his actions.
"For one thing, while Tun Dr Mahathir dismissing the former top judges was acknowledged as really improper, documented for the world to see among others in the most famous book of Tun Salleh Abas entitled "May Day For Justice: The Lord President's Version" (Magnus Books, 1989), even the usually pro-opposition law experts like Professor Dr Gurdial Singh Nijar of the Law Faculty, University of Malaya, and the fiercely independent law experts like Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi of the Law Faculty, MARA Institute of Technology, opined that the dismissal of the previous AG was constitutional," he said.
Annuar said unlike the dismissal of the top judges during Dr Mahathir's time which was challenged by those involved and which resulted in the new Chief Justice not being recognised by the Bar Council, the previous AG never challenged his dismissal while the Bar Council also fully recognised the new AG.
"It naturally goes that if the previous AG's dismissal is constitutional then the current AG's appointment is also constitutional," he said.