Following the April 25 landmark ruling of the Court of Appeal that an individual cannot be criminally sanctioned for exercising fundamental liberties, lawyers for PKR's Batu MP Tian Chua are using it in his sedition charge in an attempt to strike out the Sedition Act as unconstitutional.

Tian Chua's lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya submitted their intention in the Sessions Court today, and it will decide on June 26 if it should refer the constitutionality of the Act itself to the High Court.

Surendran and Latheefa will file a formal application, later this week, on grounds that the Court of Appeal ruling, which declared Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) 2012 as unconstitutional , can apply to the Sedition Act as well.

"Speech is a fundamental liberty,"  Surendran told reporters as the court vacated the three-day trial scheduled in the case brought by the government against Chua for making seditious remarks on the Lahad Datu incursion early last year.

The judgement by the three-men bench at the Court of Appeal stated that while restrictions can be placed on a notice period to organise public rallies, one cannot be punished for failing to adhere to those regulations.

 

This, in effect, contravenes the fundamental liberties provided under Article 10 of the federal constitution.

 

Freedom of speech and the right to assemble are among the fundamental liberties stated in it.

 

Surendran and Latheefa also pursued the constitutionality of the PAA to the Court of Appeal earlier, in representing PKR's Seri Setia assemblyperson Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.