PKR Youth defends PAA review application, says PM not involved

 

PKR Youth has defended an application by the Attorney-General’s Chambers for a review of a Federal Court ruling that declared Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 unconstitutional.

In a statement, the wing’s Legal and Public Complaints Bureau head Khairul Naim Rafidi said the application cannot be perceived as an effort to restart a prosecution or as government meddling.

“The act of filing a review application under Rule 137 cannot, in and of itself, be construed as an attempt to revive a prosecution or as executive interference.

“To directly attribute such a legal application to the prime minister is inconsistent with the constitutional principle of separation of powers,” he said.

Khairul Naim was responding to activist Amir Hariri Abdul Hadi’s statement yesterday that condemned the AGC’s application for a review under Rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995.

Amir, a former Muda secretary-general, was charged under the Act, but has since been acquitted.

Amir Hariri Abdul Hadi

Yesterday, Amir questioned Anwar’s commitment to reform and described the AGC’s application as a “betrayal” of the PKR president’s promises made before assuming power.

He also laid the blame for the decision directly at Anwar’s feet, as the AGC falls under the Prime Minister’s Department.

Preventing serious injustice

However, Khairul Naim stressed that Rule 137 is a valid provision but is “of an exceptionally limited nature”, and only allows the Federal Court to consider a review in truly exceptional circumstances.

He said an application under the rule does not amount to a rehearing or a fresh appeal, and does not permit the court to revisit the merits of the decision, findings of fact, or interpretation of law already determined.

“This position is consistent with the doctrine of finality in litigation, namely that legal disputes must ultimately reach a point of closure,” he said.

Federal Court at the Palace of Justice, Putrajaya

Khairul Naim added that Rule 137, when read together with the court’s inherent powers, may only be invoked to prevent serious injustice or abuse of process, such as a breach of natural justice or the existence of bias.

Whether the legal threshold is met, he said, is solely within the exclusive province of the Federal Court.

PKR Youth, he added, believes that genuine reform requires respect for lawful judicial processes and the judiciary's independence in discharging its constitutional functions, even in politically sensitive circumstances.

“Differences in political opinion should not be used as a basis to allege a betrayal of the reform agenda so long as legal processes continue to operate and remain subject entirely to the determination of the courts,” he said.

In July last year, a five-member bench led by then-chief justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat delivered a unanimous ruling deeming Section 9(5) of the PAA unconstitutional.

Tengku Maimun said Section 9(5) of the PAA imposes a punishment that exceeds the limits permitted under Article 10(1)(b) of the Federal Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of speech, assembly, and association.

The challenge was launched by Amir, who had been charged with the alleged failure to notify authorities before holding a protest over the littoral combat ship issue in 2022. - Mkini