From Jelapang to Jelutong: A Tale of Defiance
I must be getting old these days. A many number of times, I find myself grappling, trying hard to understand Malaysian politics. Or perhaps, it is Malaysian politics itself that has since gone warily unfathomable, rather than the sanity of my intellect.
Take, for example, the case of Karpal Singh. He wants to sue the Sultan of Perak. A whole load of people are unhappy with him for intending to do so. Numerous police reports have been lodged, at various places, all of which allege Karpal Singh as derhaka, kurang ajar, rebellious; some even asserting that he has committed acts of treason.
This is the part that I don’t quite understand. Why can’t Karpal sue the Sultan? It’s his right to do so. Of course, some of us may opine that he ought not to do so, given that it is the adat that a commoner should show subservient to the sovereign ruler.
But in these modern times, with contemporary progressive laws, the right of a citizen to task his leader to a court of justice is a fundamental liberty to be found contemporaneous in almost all jurisdictions in the world. If Karpal Singh has a bad case, his suit will be dismissed by the court, of which he would be liable for costs. In any event, it will be with the judiciary that lays the ultimate bastion of justice.
This comes to mind my other incomprehension. Why are certain sectors of the rakyat angry at Karpal Singh for wanting to sue the Sultan? I personally find this quite amusing. Karpal Singh has been suing the Sultans since time immemorial.
In 1986, he filed a civil suit against the Sultan of Johor, Tunku Mahmood Iskandar, who was then the Agong. The civil suit was filed on behalf of one Daeng Baha Ismail for damages of assault (Daeng Baha Ismail had been taken to the Johor Palace in handcuffs by police personnel and was punched and repeatedly hit by the Sultan in the presence of the Royal household). Karpal lost his case, and it was reported that the Sultan allegedly named one of his dogs after him (”A Malaysian Who Dared Sue a King” Far Eastern Economic Review, 20 May, 1993).
