GEORGE TOWN, April 18 — The Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) is needed now more than ever following controversial amendments to the Sedition Act 1948 that widen the authorities’ jurisdiction, Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said today.

The prominent human rights lawyer said without the existence of a body like the IPCMC, there is little in the way of safeguards for the public against possible abuse of power by the police in enforcing the colonial era law.

“If they want to carry on doing this, then we must also push for the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC),” she said at the inaugural Karpal Singh Forum on the Sedition Act and human rights in Malaysia here.

Since 2006, the Bar Council and civil society have pushed for the implementation of the IPCMC, which was mooted by a royal commission led by former Chief Justice Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin Abdullah.

The police top brass have consistently shot down calls for the commission to be set up, while Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told Parliament last year that the IPCMC cannot be implemented as it goes against Article 7 of the Federal Constitution and the Extra-Territorial Offences Act 1976.

Newly-elected Bar Council President Steven Thiru, who was also a panellist at the forum, noted that the amendments to the Sedition Act have created a climate of fear where even senior lawyers would be fearful of whether what they say would end up being seditious.

Senior lawyer Datuk V Sithambaran agreed, saying that never before did he feel hesitant to speak his mind over his 36 years in practice, especially at communal events, as he does not know what could be considered seditious due to the lack of boundaries in the Act’s interpretation following the amendments.

Retired judge, Datuk Mahadev Shanker, however, said there is still hope and sees it as a test of how judges are going to implement the amended Act.

“I hope they will take it into their frame of mind that they are there to protect the people, so if they obey the oath they had taken before presiding on the bench, then I think Malaysia will be okay,” he said.

Former Bar Council President Christopher Leong said the public should not be forced to practise self-censorship because of the Act and its amendments.

Ambiga also urged the public not to be cowed by heavy-handed use of oppressive laws such as the Sedition Act, saying it is important to constantly call out selective prosecution.

“Whenever anyone is charged under sedition, people must speak up. People must speak up because there’s something very wrong with the legislation,” she said, adding that the authorities should drop all charges against government critics since the amendments decriminalise criticism of the government and judiciary.

Former Bar Council President Christopher Leong, who moderated the forum, echoed Ambiga’s sentiments that the public should not be forced to practise self-censorship because of the Act and its amendments.

“Do not let a bad law silence us from speaking out for our rights,” he said.

The Dewan Rakyat last week passed amendments to the Sedition Act after a marathon 14-hour debate, amid outrage by opposition lawmakers, lawyers and civil society groups over Putrajaya’s about-turn on its pledge to repeal the law.

While the changes allow criticism against the executive and judiciary, they also make it an offence to incite “ill will, hostility or hatred” on religious grounds, while maintaining prohibitions on sparking such sentiments on racial grounds or exciting disaffection against the rulers.

Critics have accused the government of using the Sedition Act to quell dissent, as the sedition dragnet has seen lawyers, opposition lawmakers, activists and even journalists being investigated, charged or convicted under the law last year.