Two academicians wore their academic gowns in the courtroom in Kuala Lumpur today, the first day of the sedition trial against Univesiti Malaya law lecturer Azmi Sharom.

They were Malaysian Academic Movement (Move) chairperson Prof Wan Manan Wan Muda and Universiti Malaya Academic Staff Union (PKAUM) executive committee member Lai Suat Yan.

"We are doing this to uphold academic freedom," Lai said, when met inside the Session Court at the Duta Court Complex.

"The current trial of Prof Azmi Sharom is a serious attack on academic freedom and also a gross violation of the 1997 Unesco Recommendation concerning the status of higher education teaching personnel," Wan Manan said in a statement.

"Besides freedom of conscience, expression, association and movement, Article 26 of Unesco Recommendation also confers on academicians the right to contribute to social change through freely expressing their opinions of state policies," he said.

"Academic freedom is meant to protect dissent, disagreement and debate, and is essential to the discovery, intepretation and transmission of knowledge.

"We urge all Malaysian academicians with conscience to come together to uphold our academic freedom and autonomy, " Wan Manan added.

Poem dedicated to Azmi

A poem dedicated to Azmi is expected to be read out later, outside the courtroom. Azmi has challenged the sedition charge against him all the way to the apex court.

The poem, titled 'Sarjana dan Kesarjanaan', is written by USM Emeritus Professor and National Laureate Muhammad Salleh.

Other academicians who were present in support of Azmi included Move's secretary-general Rosli H Mahat and Aham Farouk Musa.

On Oct 6, the Federal Court ruled that the Sedition Act 1948 is valid under the Federal Constitution.

Azmi, 45 ( photo ), was charged under Section (1) (b) of the Sedition Act for a comment he made to Malay Mail Online on the Selangor menteri besar crisis that was brewing at the time, which was consequently published in an article titled ‘Take Perak crisis route for speedy end to Selangor impasse, Pakatan told’.

He also faced an alternative charge under Section 4(1)(c) of the same Act.

He faces a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years imprisonment.

Azmi today applied for his trial to be transferred from the Sessions Court to the High Court.

Submitting on this, defence counsel Gobind Singh Deo said despite the Federal Court ruling that the Sedition Act is constitutional, it recognises that under the Section 3 (2) of Act, it is not seditious to show that a Ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures.

“Also, it is not seditious to point out the errors or defects in a government or constitution, as established by law,” Gobind said.

Thus, the Federal Court agreed that Section 3 (2) of the Sedition Act can be used in Azmi’s defence, he said.

“The accused is therefore entitled to use this as his defence in his trial,” he said.

However, Gobind ( photo ) added, Section 3 (3) of the Sedition Act, which touches on intention, might affect the case.

Thus, he urged Sessions Court judge Amernudin Ahmad to allow the application for the trial to proceed in the High Court, as the court needs to iron out the questions of law in the proceedings.

If the case starts in a High Court, then the Federal Court would be the final venue for appeal, instead of Court of Appeal, should the matter be heard by the Sessions Court.

Deputy public prosecutor Wan Shaharudin Wan Ladin insisted that the Sessions Court has the jurisdiction to hear the matter, as the burden to prove an exception under the Act lies on with the defence.

The court will now decide whether to transfer the case to the High Court.