The Kuala Lumpur High Court today ordered DAP's Seputeh MP Teresa Kok to pay RM50,000 in costs after dismissing her civil suit against the government for unlawful arrest.
 
Judge Su Geok Yiam in delivering the decision said the court was also satisifed that Kok's arrest was lawful under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in 2008.
 
"Therefore the court orders the plaintiff's suit against the defendants dismissed with costs.
 
"The court orders the plaintiff to pay RM50,000 in costs to the defendants," she said.
 
In her suit filed on March 13, 2009, Kok named former home minister Syed Hamid Albar, former inspector-general of police Musa Hassan, special branch senior officer DSP E Kim Tien and the government as defendants.

Kok was represented by lawyer Sankara Nair while the defendants were represented by Senior Federal Council Lailawati Ali.

Kok was arrested under the ISA , after she was accused of telling mosque officials in Kota Damansara, Sri Serdang and Puchong Jaya to tone down the call to prayer (azan).

She denied the allegations, while the Kota Damansara mosques clarified it did not broadcast the azan due to a damaged amplifier and not a directive from Kok.

Kam's case takes precedence

Meanwhile, Su said the High Court was bound to apply and follow the decision of the Federal Court on the case of Kam Teck Soon in 2003.

She said it overruled Umno senator Mohamad Ezam Mohamad Nor's case in the Federal Court.

Ezam, too, had been detained under the ISA.

Kok's counsel, lawyer SN Nair, when met later by reporters said he was disappointed with the decision and pointed out how there had been favourable judgments previously, citing Ezam ( left ) who was awarded a huge sum of money.

 

"But after that, the law changed. Kam Teck Soon's case was just the reverse. (So) whatever the police say or do, the court will agree, as good reason to arrest and the defendant's argument is never considered," he said.

 

"The learned judge said she's bound by Kam Teck Soon, followed by the Borhan Daud case where the subjective test was used. The objective test, which is the fairer test, is completely overruled.

 

"If the subjective test is taken, which may be taken in Prevention of Terrorism Act (Pota) cases, then everybody's in trouble because in the subjective test, the police is always right," he said.

He also expressed unhappiness on the amount his client had to pay in costs, explaining that it was only natural for anyone who felt an injustice was being done to file a suit.

"Therefore, high cost will be penalising, it should be very low or no cost. We'll appeal the matter and have it reversed in higher courts," he said.

Lawyer: Unfair decision

 

Admitting that the judge was right in pointing out that she was constrained by the law as the High Court could not overrule the Federal Court, he however said that this could be brought to the Court of Appeal, and perhaps have the law changed.

 

"The Kam Peck Soon (case) has done great injustice, it was an unfair decision.

 

"If we appeal, we will be raising the issues there and perhaps have it overturned. Pota detainees might face same injustice," he said.

 

Kok, who expressed disappointment with the decision, said she thought about the recently passed Prevention of Terrorism Act (Pota) when listening to the judgment.

 

"Looking at the court's decision now, I'm more worried of those who might be detained under Pota. They might face the same injustice as I'm facing now," she said.

She pointed out how the police could bring a person to a magistrate based on suspicion and apply for detention without trial for the detainee, as how it was for ISA detainees.

Commenting further on her case, Kok said the right thing to do was that the police should investigate the matter first before placing her behind bars.

"So it was only natural for me to file a case against the government for wrongful arrest.

"Therefore, I support my lawyer's view, and will file the case to the Court of Appeal again and appeal the matter," she said.