YOURSAY ‘And by the same logic, to utter threats against the royal institution is not sedition.’

'Slap offer not an offence if Kok not slapped'

Ferdtan: Is Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz a qualified lawyer? He must have thought he is smart to apply contract laws to criminal laws.

“He described the offer as an ‘invitation to treat’ - a contractual law term for a non-binding offer expressing willingness to negotiate a deal.”

An inducement to offer is mainly on the selling of goods, usually in shops. Say we can accept Mohd Khairul Azam’s argument (on the law of contract), he is still wrong as the price tag (RM1,200 to slap Seputeh MP Teresa Kok) is stated and fixed. It is a definitive offer, and not an “invitation to treat”.

What stupidity. You say that as no direct threat is made by the Muslim NGOs themselves (leaving others to take up the offer), then it is not a threat.

Mr Lawyer, can we call for an assassination of an individual, putting the price tag of RM1,200, an “invitation to treat”?

Applying as you said, “In this case, no direct threat is made by any party. No one stepped forward to say they wanted to slap (or kill in my example) anyone. No one. That is the difference between a threat and a mere offer.”

It is akin to the ‘shoot his mouth off’ Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi who said that an act is not criminal as long as it has not been performed. Mohd Khairul Azam must be investigated whether he has a valid law degree.

Armageddon: This NGO lawyer explained that should someone slap Teresa Kok and the reward is paid to the assailant, only then the person who paid the reward could be tried for collusion or conspiracy.

What if the reward is not paid, is the slapping a crime? Why then people are arrested for making seditious remarks if no crime had actually taken place resulting from their seditious remarks.

I am not a lawyer but I can easily differentiate between a stupid and a smart lawyer.

Yoong John Yen: This is a very ridiculous statement by Mohd Khairul Azam. Is it,therefore, not considered intimidation or a threat to a person's safety if someone made an ‘invitation to treat’ people to kill/attack/intimidate/etc, etc, a person until someone actually commits the act?

This is definitely a very poor line of reasoning. Indeed, there's little point in taking action after the act is done as the damage is already done and by the time the authorities act, the perpetrators would be long gone.

Hang Babeuf: And by the same logic, to utter threats against the royal institution is not sedition. It becomes sedition only when you act, take up arms overtly to overthrow the monarchy.

How stupid an argument is this? If intellectual dwarfs like this one can become lawyers, it is now wonder that the nation's legal system is in chaotic disarray.

Toonarmy: Mohd Khairul Azam, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. It used to be that only qualified people are called to the Bar.

Clearly braying donkeys are now being admitted as well. You need to be slapped hard for giving such an idiotic advice.

Anon1: I fail to see what the laws of contract have anything to do with criminal laws and criminal acts. Obviously, this lawyer does not know anything about inchoate offences.

Lim Chong Leong: So people can put out contracts to hitmen to kill and it is not considered a crime?

The crime of conspiracy to commit a crime need not be the act of the crime itself but the planning, instigation or just incitement to commit it.

What kind of lawyers are we admitting to the Bar these days? Can the Bar Council please take action against such lawyers who bring shame to the profession.

YUNoAnon: So anyone can now declare a bounty on anyone and it will not be an offence if you do not pay the person? Great explanation there.

Labis Guy: I am a layperson and I am now confused about  Malaysian law.

The Bar Council states that it is an offence and our learned Mohd Khairul Azam says that it is not an offence to offer money for slapping Teresa Kok. Now who is right?

Changeagent: When they offer cash to slap Teresa Kok, others are not allowed to feel insulted.

But when McDonald’s use vegetables for promotional purposes, they themselves feel very aggrieved and insulted. Nothing makes sense at all with these irrational morons.

FairMind: Confusing criminal law with law of contract is bad enough, this lawyer went on record at a press conference demonstrating ignorance of his legal knowledge and wrongly advised his clients in full view of the public.

I am sure the Bar Council would not condone its members showing their stupidity in such manner that will cast a doubt on all their members  in the country.

The Bar Council should correct its members lest the whole country is wrongly advised or its members subjectedt o ridicule.

Just Me: The Ah Long will be extremely please with this. Now they can go around threatening people and then defend themselves saying that since they have not harm the person, it’s okay. Or is it?

Mohd Khairul Azam, where did you study law?

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .