Verdict on late Karpal Singh's sedition case on Monday
The late Karpal Singh's wife and children will know on Monday whether the RM4,000 fine for sedition over his comments on the Perak constitutional crisis will stay or be set aside.
Court of Appeal will deliver the verdict two years after the veteran DAP politician and lawyer was killed in an accident, just days after the High Court delivered its decision.
The late Karpal Singh's wife and children will know on Monday whether the RM4,000 fine for sedition over his comments on the Perak constitutional crisis will stay or be set aside.
Court of Appeal will deliver the verdict two years after the veteran DAP politician and lawyer was killed in an accident, just days after the High Court delivered its decision.
Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo, who is Karpal's son and the lead counsel, confirmed with Malaysiakini that the decision will be delivered by a three-member panel led by Justice Mohtaruddin Baki.
Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat and Justice Kamardin Hashim will be the other judges in the panel.
This comes after the bench deferred in delivering its judgment after hearing submissions on the matter four months ago.
Karpal was charged for his statement at a press conference that the sultan's decision to remove then Pakatan Rakyat menteri besar Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin can be challenged in a court of law.
He made the statement at his law firm on Jalan Pudu Lama, Kuala Lumpur, at 12.30pm on Feb 6, 2009.
Deputy public prosecutor Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud had told the Court of Appeal that the late Karpal's statement mentioning the Perak sultan - whom Karpal had criticised during the silver state's 2009 political imbroglio - fits one of the six criteria defined under Section 3 of the Sedition Act 1948.
He added that any reasonable man could see that Karpal’s words would have the desired effect of causing people to hate, or be disaffected with, the royal institution.
Gobind said his late father was merely expressing an opinion as a senior lawyer and an MP then, and therefore it is not seditious, as it concerned constitutional provisions in the federal constitution and the Perak constitution.
There is an exception under the Sedition Act to act as a safeguard to a person who was merely expressing an opinion.
"He (Karpal) had no intention to create any untoward circumstances, as he was merely lending his legal opinion in the press conference," the lawyer told the court.
Karpal was initially acquitted by the High Court, but the Court of Appeal ordered him to enter his defence and following that the High Court found the senior lawyer guilty of sedition.


Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.