The Kuala Lumpur High Court upheld the acquittal of PKR parliamentarian Tian Chua of making a seditious statement against the government in relation to the Lahad Datu intrusion.
High Court judge Nordin Hassan today maintained the decision of the Sessions Court which had earlier, in 2014, acquitted Chua of the same charge.
The judge dismissed the appeal by the prosecution on the grounds that they had failed to prove that Chua had uttered the seditious words.
The prosecution's main witness, Siti Nooraishah Geoffrey, a former Keadilan Daily reporter, had nothing to corroborate her evidence.
The judge said Nooraishah's notes were not legible and that no other documents were presented to support her evidence.
Chua, in 2013, was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court with making a statement that the militant intrusion in Lahad Datu was a planned conspiracy by Umno to divert attention and frighten the people.
The charge, under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act, 1948, is punishable under Section 4(1) of the same Act and carries a fine of RM5,000 or three years’ jail or both for a first-time offence.
The charge was, however, thrown out by judge Norsharidah Awang in November 2014 after the prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against Chua.
Deliberate manipulation by ruling party
Meanwhile, expressing his relief with the court’s decision today, Chua recalled how Umno had lodged no less than 500 reports against him.
Claiming threats to his safety then, Chua claimed that there was “deliberate manipulation” by the ruling party to defame him.
Even though he was acquitted in 2014, Chua said the case was never put to rest, pointing out how Barisan Nasional MPs had continued to make accusations against him.
“(With the) High Court's affirmation of the decision of acquittal, I hope there will be no more wild accusations that I have insulted or undermined national security,” he said.
Admitting that he feels vindicated, Chua, however, claimed that it had been his position from day one that he had never said anything defamatory nor undermined national security. -Mkini
ACQUITTAL.
ReplyDeleteExactly what kind of "ACQUITTAL"?
Knew of at least two for this scenario;
"Full Acquittal" or "Acquittal not amounting to full discharge"?
Sounds like the "LATTER"
Build a makeshift room for the fella, for convenience sake. Not that I have any "SYMPATHY" for any "POLITICIAN"; past, present or future.