Raja Petra
Raja Petra, 58, who was arrested under Section 73(1) of the ISA, is alleged to have posted articles deemed seditious and that also belittle Islam.
Last week, the Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) and several Muslim organisations lodged a police report against him for allegedly insulting Malays, Muslims and Islam.
On Sept 6, under The Corridors of Power article posted on Malaysia Today, Raja Petra had hinted that it might be his last article until Sept 16, if he were to be detained under the ISA. He is banking on Anwar’s Sept 16 promise for an early release from ISA.
“Yes, I too have placed not only my money, but also my freedom on Anwar. And if Anwar fails to deliver his promise on Sept 16, not only he but I as well am headed for a fall,” he said in his posting.
Tan
Sin Chew Daily reporter Tan Hoon Cheng is believed to have been arrested over her report on former Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail’s racist remarks while campaigning for the Permatang Pauh by-election last month.
YB Kok
DAP’s Seputeh MP Teresa Kok is also assemblyman for Kinrara and a senior executive councillor in charge of investment, industry and trade. 
Kok, 43, is believed to have been picked up in connection with a residents petition in Puchong over a mosque.
Former mentri besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo had allegedly accused Kok of being involved.
She subsequently denied the allegation and demanded an apology from Dr Mohd Khir and the newspaper which reported it.
But Why ISA?? Why Not Sedition act?
REFERRING TO THE CASES ABOVE, THEY DESERVE A TRANSPARENT TRIAL. AND IT SHOULD BE DONE AT ONCE!!!
Relevant sections of the legislation are as follows:
Section 73(1) Internal Security Act 1960: "Any police officer may without warrant arrest and detain pending enquiries any person in respect of whom he has reason to believe that there are grounds which would justify his detention under section 8; and that he has acted or is about to act or is likely to act in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to maintenance of essential services therein or to the economic life thereof."
Section 8 ISA: Power to order detention or restriction of persons. "(i) If the Minister is satisfied that the detention of any person is necessary with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to the maintenance of essential services therein or the economic life thereof, he may make an order (hereinafter referred to as a detention order) directing that that person be detained for any period not exceeding two years."
A detenu can make representations against his/her detention if an order of detention has been made against the detenu by the Minister under Section 8(1) of the ISA but under Section 73 however, the detenu seems to have no such right. Generally, the attitude of the Malaysian courts in respect of detention under Section 73 is that the courts have jurisdiction only in regard to any question on compliance with the procedural requirements of the ISA and they seldom grant any substantive rights to the detenu. ( source : Wikipedia)
SEDITION ACTSection 4 of the Sedition Act specifies that anyone who "does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires with any person to do" an act with seditious tendency, such as uttering seditious words, or printing, publishing or importing seditious literature, is guilty of sedition. It is also a crime to possess a seditious publication without a "lawful excuse". The act defines sedition itself as anything which "when applied or used in respect of any act, speech, words, publication or other thing qualifies the act, speech, words, publication or other thing as having a seditious tendency".
Under section 3(1), those acts defined as having a seditious tendency are acts with a tendency:
“ (a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government; (b) to excite the subjects of the Ruler or the inhabitants of any territory governed by any government to attempt to procure in the territory of the Ruler or governed by the Government, the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any matter as by law established;
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;
(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or of the Ruler of any State or amongst the inhabitants of Malaysia or of any State;
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia; or
(f) to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of part III of the Federal constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.
” Section 3(2) provides certain exceptions, providing examples of speech which cannot be deemed seditious. It is not seditious to "show that any Ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures", nor is it seditious "to point out errors or defects in the Government or Constitution as by law established". It is also not seditious "to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in the territory of such Government as by law established" or "to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes of the population of the Federation". However, the act explicitly states that any matter covered by subsection (1)(f), namely those matters pertaining to the Malaysian social contract, cannot have these exceptions applied to it.
Section 3(3) goes on to state that "the intention of the person charged at the time he did or attempted (a seditious act) ... shall be deemed to be irrelevant if in fact the act had, or would, if done, have had, or the words, publication or thing had a seditious tendency". This latter provision has been criticised for overruling mens rea, a legal principle stating that a person cannot be guilty of a crime if he did not have the intent to commit a crime.[1]
A person found guilty of sedition may be sentenced to three years in jail, a RM5,000 fine, or both.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRESS STATEMENT FROM MIC PRESIDENT
KUALA LUMPUR: MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu on Saturday appealed to the Government to release Sin Chew Daily News reporter Tan Hoon Cheng who was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) on Friday.
In a statement Saturday, he said he would ask Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to immediately release Tan.
He said by doing so certain elements will not blame the Government for curtailing press freedom.
Samy Vellu added that Tan is a young reporter and only reported what was said. Therefore he appealed to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to release her.
RELATED POST :
ISA = A WEAK GOVERNMENT??? ( PART 1)
ISA : WE NEED or/and DON'T NEED........
