‘The law is an ass’

The expression "The law is an ass" has its roots in literature, originating from the 1654 play Revenge of Honour. It refers to the illogical or uncompromising application of the law, disregarding common sense or morality. This sentiment is still relevant today, as evidenced by a recent case in Malaysia. The High Court declined to grant Malaysian citizenship to a man's stateless son, despite DNA evidence confirming their biological relationship.

The boy, born in Thailand to a Malaysian father and a Thai mother, was deemed ineligible for citizenship due to the lack of evidence proving his parents' marriage at the time of his birth. The court applied Section 17 of Part III of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution, treating the child as born to an unmarried mother.

Consequently, the child remains ineligible for citizenship. This underscores the inflexibility of the legal system, especially for children born out of wedlock. Politics can also add complexity to the matter. A former federal minister convicted of murder received a reduced sentence under the Pardons Board, only to be released after a royal pardon.

Does this imply society condones murder? Numerous other pardons have been granted without controversy. Meanwhile, a corruption case involving the Federal Territories Pardons Board (FTPB) has sparked debate over whether granting pardons condones corrupt behavior. Some argue that granting a pardon to an individual who has committed a crime is akin to condoning their actions.

However, the FTPB's role in the legal process is to uphold the law, regardless of the individual's standing in society. The legal framework guarantees equality before the law, and denying pardons based on personal connections is unjust. Furthermore, doubts have been raised regarding the origin of fines paid by convicted individuals, with accusations of improper use of party funds.

This highlights the need for transparency and accountability in political dealings. The Attorney-General's Chambers have also faced criticism over errors in court documents, raising questions about the competence of those involved. Ultimately, the spirit of the law should guide our actions, rather than personal biases or political considerations.

The nation must strive for a more equitable and just system, free from undue influence and corruption.