The Court of Appeal in Putrajaya today has struck out the charge brought against Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah under the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) for failing to notify the police on the holding of Bersih 4 rally last year.

The three-member bench unanimously overturned a High Court verdict that dismissed Maria's bid to strike out the charge.

Justice Tengku Maimum Tuan Mat who led the bench ruled that the appellate court's Oct 2015 decision on Johor PKR executive secretary R Yuneswaran cannot be retrospectively applied as enshrined in Article 7(1) of the Federal Constitution.

Other presiding judges were Justices Ahmadi Asnawi and Kamardin Hashim.

In Yuneswaran's case, the Court of Appeal, the nation's second highest court, then ruled that the provision that criminalises the failure to give the notice to be “constitutional, valid, and enforceable”.

But five months earlier, the same court had ruled differently in a landmark judgment involving PKR lawmaker Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.

It had declared Section 9(5) which provides the penalty for Section 9(1) of the Peaceful Assembly Act that requires rally organisers to notify police, null, void and unconstitutional.

The parties - senior lawyers M Puravelan and Ambiga Sreenevasan representing Maria, and DPPs Suhaimi Ibrahim and Hamdan Hamzah for the government - argued which decision of the Court of Appeal should be binding on Maria's case.

Suhaimi submitted that the PAA is still a valid law and Yuneswaran's case should be applied retrospectively.

In her submission, Ambiga argued that the government cannot impose criminal liability retrospectively.

"At the material time, Section 9(5) of PAA had been pronounced null and void.

"So it was not an offence then. How can you charge someone who at the material time (August 2015) acted within the ambit of the law? You can't. It will make a total mockery of the system," she submitted.

In her ruling, Justice Maimum said: "When the two decisions (Nik Nazmi and Yuneswaran) compete with each other, the later decision prevails."

While the general rule states it should take effect retrospectively, it must equally be in line with Article 7(1) of the Federal Constitution, she added.

"The High Court failed to consider the effect of Article 7(1). Therefore, we find merit in the appeal and the appeal is allowed," Justice Maimum ruled.

Article 7(1) stipulates the protection against retrospective criminal laws, meaning a person cannot be punished for something which at the time when it was done, was not an offence.

Meanwhile, Suhaimi said they will announce later whether to file an appeal to the Federal Court.

Maria had organised the Bersih 4 rally on Aug 29 and 30 last year, before the Court of Appeal had ruled in Yuneswaran's case that Section 9(5) was constitutional.

On Nov 3, 2015, Maria was charged under Section 9(5) of PAA for failing to give police a 10-day notice for Bersih 4.

She then sought to strike out the charge in High Court on the ground that Section 9(5) of PAA was still declared as invalid by another appellate court when Bersih 4 rally was organised.