The Court of Appeal today dismissed the appeal by the police and government against the High Court decision that the arrest of five lawyers providing legal aid to 14 participants of a candlelight vigil six years ago was unlawful.

The three-member bench headed by Justice Zaharah Ibrahim ( left ) also upheld the award of RM75,000 as damages to each of the five lawyers by the High Court in Kuala Lumpur.

“The court dismisses the appeal by the police and government and upholds the KL High Court decision that the arrests are unlawful.

“The court also awards costs of RM20,000 to the respondents,” Justice Zaharah ruled.

Besides Justice Zaharah, the two other panel members in the unanimous decision included Justices Varghese George Varghese and Prasad Sandosham Abraham.

High Court judge John Louis O' Hara in his decision on May 23, 2014, ruled the arrests amounted to false imprisonment as the five lawyers were held at the Brickfields police station overnight and were also denied legal representation.

The affected lawyers are Fadiah Nadwa Fikri ( right ), Murnie Hidayah Anuar, Puspawati Rosman, Syhaini Safwan and Ravinder Singh Dhaliwall

Constable Noor Balkhis Maazin, ACP Wan Abdul Bari Wan Abdul Khalid, Supt Jude Blacious Pereira, Constable Fauziah Mustafa, Inspector Azlina Norazli, Lance-Corporal Saha'ri Ehwa and the inspector-general of police were the appellants in the appeal.

Protecting police armoury?

The five arrested were there to provide legal aid to 14 protesters who took part in the candlelight vigil following the arrest of activist Wong Chin Huat.

During today's proceeding, the court even asked senior federal counsel Zureen Elina Mohd Dom and Shaiful Azlan, who appeared for the appellants, as to why the police did not allow the lawyers to see those arrested.

The reply was that the police wanted to protect their armoury from “danger”.

This led to one of the judges asking, “Danger? From the five lawyers?”

The five lawyers were represented by Sivarasa Rasiah, Farhana Haim and Farida Mohamad.

In his decision in the High Court, Justice O' Hara also criticised the arresting officer, Jude Pereira ( right ), who is now retired, for providing questionable reasons for the arrests.

“Jude  changed his testimony several times in giving reasons, under Section 28 of the Police Act, in denying the lawyers access to legal representation. This led the court to doubt the authenticity of the reasons he put forward and doubt his credibility (in denying the lawyers legal representation),” Justice O’Hara said.

This finding was the third by a court of law against Jude as not a credible witness. Jude was also the investigating officer in the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy II case.

The first came in Jude's testimony before the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) panel following the arrest of these five lawyers. The Suhakam panel was chaired by former commissioner and senior lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

In its findings, Suhakam ruled that the arrests as unlawful and the police were also criticised for their actions.

Last year, KL High Court judge Zaleha Yusof rejected Jude's bid to become a practising lawyer following the Suhakam finding, where she also ruled that the former police officer had given false evidence during the Suhakam hearing and this could not be forgiven as it affected basic rights.