FEBRUARY 5 — I have always had a soft spot for helpless strays entering my house when I was young. Mum would take a rotan and chase them out, and we would end up arguing. Being the persistent me, I would then take food from the kitchen and feed the strays.

What I am uncertain every single time, is how much that help meant to the strays, but what I knew was, I did the best I could when I was given the opportunity.

I was inspired by Karpal Singh to read law. I saw his post cards on the first day of my internship last year, and took them back home with me from office. It is clipped on my wall until this very day.

Holding onto the principles you believe in and standing up for your fellow human being is challenging. Kind people will tell you to be careful, the nastier ones would say you are immature.

Karpal Singh stood for what he believed in — the supremacy of the Federal Constitution.

Despite the repercussions of DAP being painted as a chauvinist, communist, anti-Malay and anti-Islam political party, he stood firm in rejecting Hudud.

He was also convicted under the Sedition Act for giving a legal opinion, to be precise, for stating "the removal of Nizar as MB can be challenged in a court of law".

Eric Paulsen was scheduled to be charged today for criticising Jakim. It was easy for the government to equate criticising Jakim (a government agency) as criticising Islam, and paint Eric as someone who is anti-Islam. It worked well politically.

People who want to see him punished either do not know, or are purposely ignorant with regards to Eric's work all these years.

Despite not receiving a single cent from the victims he defended, his dedication in the field of human rights is phenomenal.

I would say cases close to Eric's heart generally evolve around human rights, but more specifically, the marginalised Rohingya community, custodial deaths and abuse of police powers.

He abandoned his job at Messrs Karpal & Co about 15 years ago to join the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and United Nations High Commission for Human Rights (UNHCR) for a stint in Myanmar, Bangladesh, Nepal and Cambodia. His works and research papers on the marginalised Rohingya community can be found in journals and research papers.

The Rohingyas are a persecuted Muslim community in Myanmar, they end up fleeing as refugees. Some end up in Malaysia, doing menial works at construction sites, plantation estates and other high risk places in Malaysia.

Malaysia being a non-signatory to the 1951 United Nations Convention on Refugees effectively means that the state is not bound by international standards of human rights for refugees. Basic education, proper living condition, and other fundamental liberties are the last things the government is responsible with. 

In the end, the Rohingyas end up being exploited due to their dire circumstances. Time and time again, Eric has been the voice to this marginalized Muslim community.

On custodial deaths and abuse of police powers, the victims include A Kugan and Karuna Nithi. I had the privilege of working with him on the latter case during my stint at Lawyers for Liberty. 

I recall being lectured once for not going through my job thoroughly. It was not the money of his clients he was concerned about, but rather the perfection he strives for in advocating human rights. Many work hard for the money, but I cannot say that Eric works for the money.

Among others he defended relentlessly was Aminulrasyid, a 14 year old schoolboy who was shot 21 times gun by the police via a sub-machine gun.

I do not remember hearing any Ministers or government officials pressing for thorough investigations into the bloody tragedy back in 2010. While the authorities were playing down the issue, Eric together with Lawyers for Liberty pressed for the culprits behind the Malay boy's death be brought to justice.

For Eric, whether you are a Malay, Chinese or Indian, as long as your fundamental rights are violated, he will be ready to defend you. It was not about wealth, political mileage or power he was after. It was about upholding the rights of every single person.

In Karpal's case, it was a legal opinion. In Eric's case, it was a tweet criticising Jakim as a government agency who was misusing the khutbah.

If the government or JAKIM do not like the legal opinion and criticism given, a matured step would be to debate about it. If "debat bukan budaya kita", then offer a counter argument. There was no need for the undignified move to exert power through the Sedition Act.

"Seditious tendency" in the Act itself relates to anything "said or printed that raises discontent or dissatisfaction against the government". The broad definition would mean dissatisfaction following exposure of corrupt practise could rain sedition charges on whistle-blowers.

Many law students during their earlier days chose law because of 'justice'. True, that it is cliche, but it reflects the sincerity one has. But after exposure to the uncertainties, pressure, external powers and risks, a lot of this burning desire has fizzled out.

Many have backed off, for fear of backlashes. It could be the negative reputation, oppression from the authorities, fear of offending others or even fear of breaking one's rice bowl.

Both Karpal and Eric are an exceptional breed in Malaysia. They have maintained the principles they believe in, and really, Malaysia needs more Karpal Singhs and Eric Paulsens.

* Adrian Lim Chee En is a former intern at Lawyers for Liberty and also the founder of Mahasiswa Ganyang Akta Hasutan, a coalition of 20 student organisations across the country. He tweets at @adrianlimcheeen.

** This is the personal opinion of the writers or organisation and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.