Sedition Act 1948 used against activist Chegu Bard: The Malaysian politician was convicted in Johor Bahru for a Facebook post linking the King and PM Anwar Ibrahim to alleged casino discussions in Forest City, fined RM5,000 (20-month jail default), and disqualified from contesting elections. 

Criticism of selective enforcement and broken reform promises: Once a key Pakatan Harapan reform pledge (including by Anwar), the colonial-era law continues to be weaponised against opposition figures, activists, and critics questioning royalty, governance, and major projects like Forest City. 

Call for abolition: The vague, broadly applied Act is seen as lawfare that chills free speech, contradicts constitutional democracy, and protects elites; critics urge repeal in favour of narrower laws (e.g., defamation) to restore public trust and genuine political discourse.

The Urgent Need for the Abolition of this Colonial Relic

In the annals of Malaysian political theatre, few props have proven as versatile and enduring as the Sedition Act 1948. This colonial relic, inherited from British efforts to suppress anti-colonial sentiment, continues to cast a long shadow over the nation’s fragile democracy. 

Its latest high-profile casualty, activist and politician Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegu Bard stands convicted in the Johor Bahru Sessions Court for a Facebook post linking high-level figures, including the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, to alleged discussions about a casino project in Forest City. 

Fined RM5,000 with a 20-month jail term in default, Chegu Bard now finds himself disqualified from contesting in upcoming state or parliamentary elections. One more activist’s voice is silenced, one potential challenger removed from the political board. This is not justice; it is lawfare, the strategic weaponization of legal processes to achieve political ends. 

The Sedition Act exemplifies this perfectly. 

Enacted during the dying days of the British Colonial Empire, it criminalizes speech with a “seditious tendency”, which is anything considered by........

© Eurasia Review