Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) have filed a lawsuit against the Malaysian government over the latter’s alleged failure to uphold the former’s freedom of speech from being encroached by Singapore’s anti-fake news law.
Law firm Messrs Daim & Gamany filed the Originating Summons (OS) on behalf of the two plaintiffs - LFL and its adviser N Surendran - at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Registry on Sept 18.
The lawsuit named the Malaysian government as the sole defendant.
The new legal action is linked to LFL’s earlier suit against Singapore’s Home Minister K Shanmugam (below) over the republic’s attempt to enforce its Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 (Pofma) against the group.
The Kuala Lumpur-based human rights group’s earlier suit targeted Shanmugam’s order for LFL to admit alleged falsehoods in a blog post.
According to a copy of the new OS sighted by Malaysiakini this afternoon, the two plaintiffs claimed that the defendant has failed to uphold their fundamental right to free speech and expression when it (Malaysian government) adopted the position that the earlier suit against Shanmugam is an abuse of court process.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant failed in its duty when it adopted the stance that the Kuala Lumpur High Court has no jurisdiction to hear the issue of the validity of Pofma.
The plaintiffs claimed that the defendant had this stance when the attorney-general of Malaysia (AG) was allowed by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to intervene in the suit against Shanmugam on June 22.
“Based on the above, the defendant, through the action of the attorney-general of Malaysia, has acted in breach of Article 10(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution.
“In essence, the defendant is (allegedly) ready to allow foreign law to be operationalized extraterritorially by which the plaintiffs’ right to freedom of speech would be subverted by foreign law.
“The defendant has, with respect, thus failed in the fulfilment of its duties to its citizenry.
“This raises a genuine fear on the part of the plaintiffs that the government of Singapore may in future by recourse to the Summons and Warrants (Special Provisions) Act 1971, or so otherwise, subject the plaintiffs to Pofma including by bringing charges in Singapore Courts against the plaintiffs,” the OS stated.
According to the suit’s affidavit in support by Surendran, the plaintiffs claimed that the AG seemed to support the right of the Singaporean government to extend the reach of its law to Malaysian citizens within Malaysia who are exercising their constitutional rights.
“This raises a genuine fear on the part of the plaintiffs that the government of Singapore may in future, by recourse to, inter alia, the Summons and Warrants (Special Provisions) Act 1971, act against the plaintiffs including by bringing charges under Pofma in Singapore Courts against them,” Surendran claimed through the Affidavit in Support.
When contacted by Malaysiakini, the plaintiffs’ counsel Shahid Adli Kamarudin confirmed that the suit’s cause papers have been served on the defendant (Malaysian government) on Sept 18.
The lawyer added that the matter is set for case management by the Kuala Lumpur High Court Registry on Oct 19. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.