A senior PDRM officer is quoted in the Press as saying that the PDRM are investigating an University of Malaysia academic for allegedly making a “controversial statement” about the “role of the Agong”. The latter, according to our stalwart guardians of the law, amounts to “sedition”.

If the PDRM lack an in house expert on the criminal law they have full access to the office of the AG for any necessary guidance and would be well advised to seek it before, once more, putting their collective foot in their collective mouth

The role of the Agong is clearly defined in the Constitution, even if it is not adhered to, and it cannot possibly be seditious, even in Moo Malaysia, to refer to it. Indeed why should it attract any comment or interest at all if it had been adhered to as the Constitution prescribes?

PN Malaysia is beginning to bear an unfortunate resemblance to authoritarian dictatorships where criticism of any kind brings jackbooted police breaking down the door. If Moo is not prepared to be criticised he should leave politics and seek a less controversial role. Butler to a Sultan?