Attorney-general Mohd Apandi Ali should reconsider the use of the Sedition Act 1948 against government critics in light of the European Parliament resolution on human rights abuses in Malaysia, said lawyer New Sin Yew.

“One of the points raised (in the resolution ) was the use of the Sedition Act to crack down on the freedom of speech and expression.

“So in light of that, I think the attorney-general should really reconsider its position in using the Sedition because it is gaining notoriety around the world,” he told reporters outside the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court today.

In the meantime, he said he will send a letter of representation to the AG asking for the sedition charges against his client, Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) central committee member S Arutchelvan, to be dropped.

This is on grounds that the charges violate his freedom of expression.

In addition, since Arutchelvan's alleged offence was in relation to a statement he made on behalf of the party as its secretary-general at the time, he argued that prosecution against Arutchelvan would have a chilling effect on other political parties.

The letter of representation will be sent by Jan 26 next year, which is the next hearing date for Arutchelvan's trial.

Arutchelvan was charged on Nov 2 over a statement he made on Facebook.

He commented on the Feb 10 Court of Appeal decision to uphold the Sodomy II conviction of then opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, on the same day the court decision was made.

For the statement that has been deemed highly critical of the judiciary, Arutchelvan was charged under Section 4(1)(c) of the Sedition Act, which criminalises the publication of seditious materials.

He also faces an alternative charge under Section 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, for abuse of network facilities.

Meanwhile in the court presided by judge Amernudin Ahmad today, deputy public prosecutor Azlika Mohd Alias informed that Arutchelvan's laptop and phone seized over the course of investigations will be returned, to which Arutchelvan expressed relief.

“I am glad that they are returning my handphone, because it was unnecessary (to seize it) since it is a Facebook charge,” he told reporters outside the court.