Chegubard claims Selamatkan Malaysia rally a ‘chance meeting’

 

Badrul Hisham Shaharin claims the investigation against the Selamatkan Malaysia rally’s participants is unlawful.

KUALA LUMPUR: Selamatkan Malaysia Movement secretariat committee member Badrul Hisham Shaharin said the Sept 16 rally was a “chance meeting”, not an intentional assembly.

“As someone on the secretariat committee, I declare that no gathering or parade took place on Sept 16.

“What happened was that we were praying at a mosque in Kampung Baru. Later, Tun Faisal Ismail Aziz (another member of the committee) went to the Dang Wangi police station to lodge a report, and the crowd wanted to follow us.

“What could we have done?” said Badrul, or Chegubard, after giving his statement on the rally at the station today.

He claimed the “speeches” made on that day were simply “celebrations among the crowd and supporters” and “interviews with media personnel”.

“Tun Faisal promised to speak to the media after he lodged the report. There were too many people, so we had to use a PA system to address the crowd. For me, nothing wrong was committed here,” he said.

Badrul also said he had lodged a report against the attorney-general’s chambers and the police as he claimed the investigation against the rally’s participants was unlawful.

He said the precedent case of Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad v Public Prosecutor in 2014 showed that Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 (PAA) is unconstitutional as it is against the right to assemble peacefully.

However, a check by FMT found that another Court of Appeal decision in 2015 ruled that the particular article is “valid and enforceable” within the boundary of the constitution in the case against R Yuneswaran for unlawfully organising the “Blackout 505” rally in 2013.

According to a report by The Malaysian Insider, a three-member bench chaired by Justice Raus Sharif said Section 9(5) of the PAA did not run afoul of Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.

As such, Raus said, the bench had to depart from a previous Court of Appeal ruling that Section 9(5) was unconstitutional.

The Court of Appeal’s 2015 ruling on Section 9(5) of the PAA remains the latest decision to date. - FMT