Peaceful Assembly Bill mala fide, says ex top cop

A former senior investigating officer said the Peaceful Assembly bill - that was passed at its second reading last week - was `mala fide’ or done with ill intentions.

Former Kuala Lumpur CID chief Mat Zain Ibrahim said Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who tabled the bill for its second reading on Nov 24, may not have the “clean hands” required to introduce new legislation that touches on “public justice”.

He cited the PM whose statutory declaration gave a false affidavit during the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial, saying that Mat Zain said was a “public injustice”.

“I question Najib’s motive in tabling the bill and having it passed speedily in the face of so many people objecting to it.

“Is it to stop protests and peaceful demonstrations over his own misconduct and abuse of power amongst his or senior officials of the government’s administration, past and present?” he asked.

The former top cop said the fact that the government made the rushed amendments to the Bill before having it quickly passed at the second reading, already proved that the Bill at its inception was mala fide and was intended to “whack” the people.

He added that the law was drafted under the watchful eyes of attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail whose character was “dubious” following recent revelations.

Without mincing his words, Mat Zain said Gani overseeing the Bill was as if putting the rights of the people in the hands of a criminal.

“What Najib has done in the Peaceful Assembly Bill is therefore not surprising,” he said.

‘Challenge Bill in court’

“I also welcome the efforts made by several MPs who filed a judicial review application on Friday to challenge the legality of the Bill who have named Najib and the government as respondents.

“In my view, this is a civilised, logical and credible move that can be taken to resolve the problem, as holding street demonstrations now would only worsen the situation.”

This, Mat Zain said, is an appropriate time to test Najib in court as the prime minister is in a bind following his affidavits in support and in reply, dated Sept 21 and 23 respectively, could be proven to be false.

On the affidavits, he said he believed Najib and his wife were legally advised on its repercussions in possible action either in a civil or criminal proceeding, before signing them .

“The affidavit truly challenges Najib’s credibility and he can be cross-examined on the matter and cannot set-aside the subpoena as what he had done.”

[More to follow]