June 11 decision on illegal gathering at mosque
Hafiz YatimPublished: May 8, 2014 6:48 AM | Updated: May 8, 2014 7:48 AM
The sessions court in Kuala Lumpur has fixed June 11 to decide whether to call Bukit Katil MP Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin and four former university students to enter their defence on a charge of gathering in a restricted area.
Sessions judge Mat Ghani Abdullah deferred delivering his judgment today, saying he wanted submissions from the counsel for the former students.
The sessions court in Kuala Lumpur has fixed June 11 to decide whether to call Bukit Katil MP Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin and four former university students to enter their defence on a charge of gathering in a restricted area.
Sessions judge Mat Ghani Abdullah deferred delivering his judgment today, saying he wanted submissions from the counsel for the former students.
Lawyers Eric Paulsen, Michelle Yesudas and Shahid Adli, who appeared for the four - Adam Adli Abdul Halim, Mohd Safwan Anang, Ehsan Bukharee Badrul Hisham and Mohd Bukhairi Suffian - said they would file their written submissions before the end of the month.
Mohd Yusmadi Yusof, who appeared for Shamsul Iskandar, had filed in his written submission earlier. DPP Ahmad Ishrakh Saad appeared for the prosecution.
The former students and Shamsul Iskandar are charged, under the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA), with gathering illegally at a place of worship, the Ar Rahman Mosque near Universiti Malaya, on June 22.
Shamsul Iskandar was charged after Adam Adli,Mohd Safwan, Ehsan Bukharee and Mohd Bukhairi had been charged.
Constitutionality of charge also challenged
The four have also filed an application to challenge the constitutionality of their charge under Section 4(2) of the PAA on grounds that it violates their right to peaceful assembly. The decision on this has been fixed for May 26 by the High Court Kuala Lumpur.
The outcome of this High Court decision is highly certain to have an impact on the June 11 sessions court decision.
Shamsul Iskandar’s lawyer Mohd Yusmadi has also filed a separate application challenging the constitutionality of Section 4(2), on grounds of it going against Article 10 of the Federal Constitution on Freedom of Assembly and Article 11 on religious freedom.
This application has been fixed for case management on May 23.
Meanwhile, in another matter, High Court judge John Loius O’Hara fixed June 3 for further case management in the suit by National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) and its chairperson Mohamad Salleh Ismail against Pandan MP and PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli and Malaysiakini.
The court also fixed the same date to hear submissions in the other legal action of the NFC, against Public Bank Bhd, for which Justice O’Hara will give his decision based on evidence from affidavits, without going for a full trial.
NFC lawyer Hariharan Tara Singh informed reporters of this after the matter came up in court.
Hariharan said in the case against Rafizi and Malaysiakini, witness statements have already been filed and senior lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah will also be appearing for NFC at the June 3 hearing.
Sessions judge Mat Ghani Abdullah deferred delivering his judgment today, saying he wanted submissions from the counsel for the former students.
Lawyers Eric Paulsen, Michelle Yesudas and Shahid Adli, who appeared for the four - Adam Adli Abdul Halim, Mohd Safwan Anang, Ehsan Bukharee Badrul Hisham and Mohd Bukhairi Suffian - said they would file their written submissions before the end of the month.Mohd Yusmadi Yusof, who appeared for Shamsul Iskandar, had filed in his written submission earlier. DPP Ahmad Ishrakh Saad appeared for the prosecution.
The former students and Shamsul Iskandar are charged, under the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA), with gathering illegally at a place of worship, the Ar Rahman Mosque near Universiti Malaya, on June 22.
Shamsul Iskandar was charged after Adam Adli,Mohd Safwan, Ehsan Bukharee and Mohd Bukhairi had been charged.
Constitutionality of charge also challenged
The four have also filed an application to challenge the constitutionality of their charge under Section 4(2) of the PAA on grounds that it violates their right to peaceful assembly. The decision on this has been fixed for May 26 by the High Court Kuala Lumpur.
The outcome of this High Court decision is highly certain to have an impact on the June 11 sessions court decision.
Shamsul Iskandar’s lawyer Mohd Yusmadi has also filed a separate application challenging the constitutionality of Section 4(2), on grounds of it going against Article 10 of the Federal Constitution on Freedom of Assembly and Article 11 on religious freedom.
This application has been fixed for case management on May 23.
Meanwhile, in another matter, High Court judge John Loius O’Hara fixed June 3 for further case management in the suit by National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) and its chairperson Mohamad Salleh Ismail against Pandan MP and PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli and Malaysiakini.
The court also fixed the same date to hear submissions in the other legal action of the NFC, against Public Bank Bhd, for which Justice O’Hara will give his decision based on evidence from affidavits, without going for a full trial.
NFC lawyer Hariharan Tara Singh informed reporters of this after the matter came up in court.
Hariharan said in the case against Rafizi and Malaysiakini, witness statements have already been filed and senior lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah will also be appearing for NFC at the June 3 hearing.
View Comments0