In fact, even Article 5 -- personal liberty itself does not include the right to travel overseas and to have a passport. The government has discretion whether to issue or not to issue, delay the issue of or withdraw a passport. As for the protection against banishment, Malaysia had abolished the Banishment act 1959 which has not been applied since 34 years ago since the case of Home Minister v Chu Choon Yong and Anor. In my opinion, I agree with it when someone is offended, he or she does not have the right to travel to other country. Consequently, in some circumstances, I disagree with above statement especially in the case of Government of Malaysia & Ors v Loh Wai Kong, Loh need to renew his resident visa otherwise the visa will expire. For the abolishing of Banishment act, I support it as it is 21th century now and we, new generation no need to banish citizen to another place unless there is someone very dangerous until threaten the safety of our
In fact, even Article 5 -- personal liberty itself does not include the right to travel overseas and to have a passport. The government has discretion whether to issue or not to issue, delay the issue of or withdraw a passport. As for the protection against banishment, Malaysia had abolished the Banishment act 1959 which has not been applied since 34 years ago since the case of Home Minister v Chu Choon Yong and Anor. In my opinion, I agree with it when someone is offended, he or she does not have the right to travel to other country. Consequently, in some circumstances, I disagree with above statement especially in the case of Government of Malaysia & Ors v Loh Wai Kong, Loh need to renew his resident visa otherwise the visa will expire. For the abolishing of Banishment act, I support it as it is 21th century now and we, new generation no need to banish citizen to another place unless there is someone very dangerous until threaten the safety of our