The Court of Appeal today sent a strong message to the Attorney-General’s Chambers to stop making bumbling typographical errors when it cited a non-existing section in the Sedition Act.

Judge Md Apandi Ali, who was one of the three judges on the Court of Appeal panel, made the remark when the Notice of Appeal filed by the prosecution stated the section where lawyer Karpal Singh was charged for sedition, was under Section 41(1) of the Sedition Act.

However, the Sedition Act only has 11 sections as Karpal had pointed in the preliminary objection which he raised. This follows the prosecution’s appeal of his acquittal last year.

Karpal said it cannot be this way as the notice, which cites a non-existing section, is a defect.

To make matters worse, he said the notice was signed by the solicitor-general Idrus Harun.

“Following this, I apply that the appeal by the prosecution is dismissed as there is nothing before the court as the notice is erroneous,” he said.

NONEDPP Noorin Badaruddin (right), leading the prosecution team, admitted the mistake and error on the prosecution’s part.

Stating it was a typo error, Noorin said there should be a bracket after the number 4.

“However, the error does not affect the case, and it can be amended as the trial which Karpal faced at the Kuala Lumpur High Court was under Section 4(1),” she said.

“I was out the whole day yesterday and was told of the error in the evening,” said Noorin.

Justice Apandi asked Noorin who made the mistake, and she admitted it could have been one of the clerks.

This led to Apandi to warn her, “You pass this message to the chambers, when you do your job you must do it correctly.”

The other judges hearing the appeal were Justice Ahmad Maarop, who was leading the panel, and Justice Clement Allan Skinner.

However, the panel unanimously dismissed the senior lawyer’s preliminary objection, as Skinner pointed out amendments can be made orally.

The panel then ordered the hearing to continue.

Karpal had been acquitted

On June 11 last year, Karpal was acquitted by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on a charge of sedition against the Perak sultan, after the prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case.

Karpal was acquitted without his defence being called.

He was charged with sedition on the contents of his Feb 6, 2009, press conference, during which he said legal action could be instituted against the Perak sultan over his role in the state constitutional crisis.

He was charged under section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1948, which carries a maximum fine of RM5,000 or a jail term of three years, or both, if found guilty.

Justice Azman Abdullah, in acquitting Karpal, said the lawyer’s action did not amount to sedition as it fell under an exception provided by law.

“After scrutinising the statements to the press, I find that they fall within the exception in Section 3(2)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948,” judge Azman ruled.

Today, Noorin submitted that a prima facie case should be called against Karpal as he was questioning the prerogative of the sultan under Article 16 (1) of the Perak constitution in appointing the menteri besar.

“This has resulted in unrest where 103 police reports was filed against Karpal,” he said.

Lawyer Jagdeep Singh Deo, who appeared with his father, said it does not fall within the ambit of sedition as the law says you can take action against the public authority which in this case is the sultan.

“One cannot deny this as it is within the law,” he said.

The hearing continues tomorrow with submissions from Jagdeep.