The Federal Court ruling today that the 60-day police detention on five reformasi leaders was unlawful and yet not ordering their immediate release, provoked retorts such as "schizophrenic approach", "anti-climax", "a virtual dispense of justice" and "lukewarm".

Leaders of opposition parties disclosed their disappointment with the court's decision not to make a consequential order seeing as the detainees are no longer under police detention but detained at the Home minister's order.

Today a four-member panel of the Federal Court unanimously allowed the appeals of the reformasi activists Keadilan leaders Tian Chua, Mohd Ezam Mohamed Nor and Saari Sungib, malaysiakini columnist-cum-film maker Hishmamuddin Rais and FreeAnwar.com webmaster Raja Petra Kamaruddin to declare their detention as unlawful.

They were arrested in April last year and subsequently filed a writ of habeas corpus seeking to be relased from detention under the ISA, which allows detention without trial.

Keadilan president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail said, upon hearing the news, that she had almost expected the five to be released considering that the court had ruled "the root cause for the detention to be unlawful".

"It was a virtual dispense of justice. While the court unanimously held that the police were wrong, and that the detainees were unjustly held, yet because they were later detained under a different section, they cannot be freed," she said.

Same team loses and wins

However, Wan Azizah welcomed the ruling that the court can question the validity of the reasons of arrest given by the police.

PRM president Dr Syed Husin Ali said today's judgment was "almost like witnessing a game where the same team wins and loses at the same time".

"It was an anti-climax. Now it seemed that you can be unlawfully detained by the police but yet the detention can be lawful under another section of the same act. It is rather odd from a layman's point of view especially when the court had ruled that certain allegations against all detainees have not been proven.

"If the court had found that the police decision was unlawful, then, from my point of view of justice, they ought to be released," he said.

He said today's judgment is enough for the authorities to reconsider the detention order and strongly urged the government to order for the release of the reformasi activists as soon as possible.

Like Syed Husin, Keadilan secretary-general Sahri Bahri urged the minister to take cognizance of the ruling and order for the five to be released.

Although the judgment failed to free the detainees, he said it is a moral victory to all reformasi supporters to continue their struggle for justice.

Politically motivated

It had also proved Keadilan's contention that the arrests of their leaders were politically motivated and made in bad faith, and that the allegation that they were involved in militant activities were false, Sahri added.

DAP chairperson Lim Kit Siang said that the failure to follow through the decision with the freedom of the detainees had made today's ruling artificial and disappointing.

He said that the decision had created a "schizophrenic approach" to the ISA because while the court had subjected the police detention power under Section 73 of the ISA to the objective test, it did not apply the same principle to the minister's detention order under Section 8 of the same act.

In a joint statement, the families of the detainees said they had expected that their loved ones will not receive the justice that they truly deserved.

The fact that they had prepared the press statement a few days earlier showed they had no confidence in the judiciary.

"Today we may have lost our struggle to seek justice, but the Good Book tells us that justice may be delayed but never denied. One day, we will be accorded justice when we all face God to answer our deeds here on earth," they said.

Suaram stunned

Non-governmental organisation Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) said it is stunned that the reformasi leaders continue to be detained illegally.

Despite the ruling that they should have never been detained initially, it failed to address their continued detention as ordered by the minister, the human rights NGO said in a statement.

"The lukewarm judgment failed on the key issue of upholding justice and did little to redeem the declining image of the judiciary."

At the initial hearing of the appeal, the attorney-general claimed that the appeal was academic as they are now detained under the minister's order but senior lawyers had argued that the issue was alive and this was unanimously agreed on by the judges.

"At no point did they advise the lawyers to file a second writ of habeas corpus against the ministry. If the judges are sincere, even partially, about seeing justice done, they could have made the proper advice to file separate writs. Justice delayed is justice denied," Suaram added.