THE allegedly seditious statement by Universiti Malaya Association of New Youth (Umany) on the powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong was meant for academic discussion, said its president, Yap Wen Qing.

Yap told The Malaysian Insight the student group did not criticise the monarchy but was stating facts gathered from lawyers and constitutional experts.

“We wanted to express our academic opinion, nothing more than that. We know there will be consequences to comment on the king’s decree, so it was purely based on academic grounds,” Yap said.

“I do not understand why so many people tried to intimidate us after the statement was released. It was an academic opinion,” said the 22-year-old physics student.

Police called Yap for questioning and he is now investigated under the Sedition Act and the Communications and Multimedia Act.

Yap became a target for saying that under Article 40 of the federal constitution, the king must act in accordance with the cabinet’s advice, except on three matters: the appointment of the prime minister; refusing a request to dissolve Parliament; and convening a meeting among the Malay rulers.

The statement was made after the king rejected Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s proposal for a proclamation of emergency and advised MPs to support Budget 2021 tabled last Friday.

On Saturday, five police officers, three of whom were in plainclothes, raided Yap’s home in Petaling Jaya, Selangor.

Yap told The Malaysian Insight that he refused them entry, until his lawyer was present, as they came in an unmarked car.

“One of them showed me his identification, but I was adamant that they wait until my lawyer arrived.

“They threatened to force themselves in, but in the end, waited for my lawyer to arrive. They took away my laptop and handphone,” he said.

Six Umany committee members were also called up for questioning on Monday at the Kajang district police station.

“This was unnecessary. They have my statement as the president (of Umany). Also, the arrest of Wong (former president Wong Yan Ke) on Saturday was uncalled for. The police were overreacting,” he said.

Wong was detained after he was accused of obstructing the police by recording the raid at Yap’s home after arriving with the lawyer.

Wong told The Malaysian Insight that he did not obstruct any officer and was filming to make sure that police did not abuse their power.

“In order to ensure my junior’s safety, I started a FB Live recording as we could not identify the officers. Umany members have been intimidated in the past.

“We received harassing calls from various parties and since there have been many cases of bogus officers, we were worried that they might be criminals pretending to be police officers and taking the law into their own hands.

“We also wanted the recording to be used as evidence in court if the need arose. Regardless of whether these men were genuine police officers, if they abused their power, violated SOP (standard operating procedure) or infringed on Yap’s fundamental human rights and freedom, video recording may be the most effective evidence,” he said.

Wong managed to record for less than three minutes before he was handcuffed. He was taken to Damansara police station for questioning.

“I learnt that a high-ranking police officer ordered my detention. The next morning, at 11.30am I was questioned for the second time and was released at 12.30pm,” Wong said.

“I categorically deny all allegations made by the police. 

“I have never obstructed the police from doing their duty. Not physically or verbally, I did not do anything to obstruct their duty. What I did was merely recorded a video,” he said.

Federal CID director Huzir Mohamed, however, said yesterday Wong committed an offence under Section 186 of the Penal Code for obstructing a public servant in discharging his or her public functions.

All police investigations are confidential and, therefore, cannot risk exposure to the public, especially on social media.

“The police would like to stress that taking a photo or recording a video is not an offence. However, for the sake of the investigation, if the photo or video is shared, spread, or goes viral on social media or in any (other) way, it could obstruct an investigation.

“And, it goes against provisions under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998,” Huzir had said.

Human rights groups Bersih 2.0 and Transparency International Malaysia slammed police for the probe into Yap and the arrest of Wong.

The groups said police were being biased by taking action against Wong but ignored former minister Rais Yatim, who tweeted something similar.

Rais, who is now Dewan Negara president, said on October 26 that Agong had not complied with Articles 40 and 40(1A) of the constitution when he decided against declaring an emergency, as requested by the prime minister. – November 11, 2020.