Sedition Act ILLEGAL as it is not enacted by Parliament - Gobind tells Prof Azmi trial

KUALA LUMPUR - The defence in academic Assoc Prof Dr Azmi Sharom’s sedition rap argued today that the Sedition Act 1948 cannot stand a constitutional test as it was not created by an act of Parliament.

Lead counsel Gobind Singh Deo said legitimate concerns arise over the validity of the Act, as Article 10(2) of the Federal Constitution clearly states that only Parliament may enact a law that imposes restrictions on freedom of expression, assembly and association.

He noted that the Act initially took form as an ordinance created by the British before Independence, and subsequently amended to become an Act by a law revision commission in 1969.

“Our argument is that the law is void, so that means the charge cannot arise... can a law that is not in conformity with the Federal Constitution override such provisions?” Gobind told the Sessions Court when arguing for Azmi’s application to refer his case to the High Court.

Last week, Azmi filed an application to challenge the constitutionality of the Act, seeking to bring the matter before a High Court as it is a matter of “constitutional concern”.

The prosecution, however, countered today that the Act exists well within the confines of the Federal Constitution as provided for under Article 162, which recognises laws that have been around before independence.

Citing subsection 1 of the provision, deputy public prosecutor Suhaimi Ibrahim said that pre-Merdeka laws “shall, until repealed by the authority having power to do so under this Constitution, continue in force on and after Merdeka Day”.

“So on the question if it is an act of Parliament or enacted through Parliament, (Article) 162 states that it is implicit,” he told the court.

On September 2, Azmi was charged under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1948 at the Sessions Court here for a remark he made in an article published on Malay Mail Online.

Section 4(1)(b) states that “uttering any seditious words” is an offence punishable with a fine not exceeding RM5,000 for a first time offence, or imprisonment not exceeding five years for subsequent offences.

The law lecturer pleaded not guity for his quotes in a Malay Mail Online article published on August 14 and titled, “Take Perak crisis route for speedy end to Selangor impasse, Pakatan told”.

In it, Azmi had cautioned Pakatan Rakyat (PR) against taking any action outside the Selangor state assembly to resolve the ongoing impasse over the Selangor mentri besar’s post, and insisted the lawmakers wait until next sitting to indicate their lack of confidence.

Sessions Court judge Zanol Rashid Hussain set October 1 to deliver his decision on Azmi’s application. -Malay Mail