Former University Malaya Association of New Youth (Umany) chairperson Wong Yan Ke has filed an appeal to obtain potential witnesses’ statements the police had recorded over a 2019 UM convocation protest.

The activist’s appeal before the Kuala Lumpur High Court is against the Magistrate Court’s refusal to allow his application for the eight statements in order to strengthen his defence.

On April 5 last year, the lower court ordered Wong (above) to enter his defence in the case linked to his protest against former Universiti Malaya vice-chancellor Abdul Rahim Hashim.

Magistrate Fardiana Haryanti Ahmad Razali ruled that the prosecution succeeded in establishing a prima facie (answerable) case against the activist over a charge of insult with intent to provoke a breach of the peace per Section 504 of the Penal Code.

When contacted by Malaysiakini, Wong’s counsel Chan Yen Hui confirmed that her client is appealing to secure the witnesses’ statements under Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

According to his affidavit in support of the copy of the application filed at the lower court, Wong contended that it is “necessary or desirable” for the defence team to be given the documents to ensure justice during the trial.

“The recorded statements (under) Section 112 are material, required and appropriate, and may be able to assist the defence’s case,” the 26-year-old said.

Wong’s former UM batch mates are among the potential witnesses.

The activist claimed that the application is bona fide (done in good faith), does not prejudice any parties, and would save the court’s time by enabling the defence team to interview the potential witnesses for the accused.

Police: Documents are confidential

However, in an affidavit to support the prosecution’s objection against the application, Ong Seng Keong - the investigating officer who recorded the witnesses’ statements as part of the probe against Wong - contended that the documents are “privileged” as they were communication done in “official confidence” with the police.

Ong claimed that revealing the written statements would prejudice and jeopardise public interest as it may deter future potential witnesses of other cases from coming forward to give their statements to the police as part of an investigation.

The police officer pointed out that the written statements are stamped “sulit” (confidential) per Section 16A of the Official Secrets Act 1972.

The High Court has set Wong’s appeal for case management on March 27.

The defence stage of the trial against Wong resumes tomorrow before the Magistrate’s Court.

In the course of the prosecution stage of the trial, 13 witnesses had given their sworn evidence, including Rahim.

Wong’s charge under Section 504 carries up to two years in jail, a fine or both.

Racism claims

Wong allegedly caused a scene during UM’s convocation on Oct 14, 2019, protesting against Rahim, the varsity’s then vice-chancellor, for alleged racist remarks.

Upon receiving his graduation scroll on stage, the then engineering student yelled: “Tolak rasis. Undur VC. Ini Tanah Malaysia” (Reject racists. VC step down. This is Malaysian land).

Among the reasons Wong cited in his protest was that Rahim allegedly promoted racism and hatred, infringed on academic freedom, served as a “political puppet” and failed to solve UM’s financial problems.

He later alleged that part of his protest was also against Rahim’s “racist” speech during the controversial Malay Dignity Congress on Oct 6, 2019.

In his speech, Rahim allegedly claimed the change in government after GE14 had eliminated Malay political dominance and asserted that Malay privileges were being questioned.

Rahim also allegedly warned others not to challenge the social contract.

The varsity expressed that it was in full support of the vice-chancellor, condemning Wong’s “rude and unacceptable” actions. It later lodged a police report on the matter.